Microsoft Office X for the Macintosh goes out over the local LAN and makes sure no other Macs on the network are running Office X with a matching registration key.
Cheyenne's ArcServe product does this too, last time I worked with it. It even checks your WAN for installations at remote sites that are sharing the same license key, and keeps popping up warning dialog boxes to that effect if it finds any.
Quite annoying and intrusive, and makes me want to choose alternate products when it happens - but still not as bad as reporting IP info to the software publisher via the Internet!
Well, saying it's "ILLEGAL to ghost a PC for which you only have an OEM license" isn't quite accurate.
Microsoft wanted everyone to believe that was the case, a couple years ago - when they really started trying to enforce new and (supposedly) existing rules on what someone could/couldn't do with OEM software. A huge corporate backlash caused them to quickly quiet down on the issue, however - and the legality has never been court tested.
In fact, almost all of the restrictions MS claims are in effect for your OEM software (vs. a retail license) are questionably enforceable by law. Too many folks are just accepting Microsoft's claims at face value and not fighting them.
Example #1: MS says your OEM operating system shipped with your new PC is effectively "married" to that system, and is not for resale or installation on any other PC. You're supposed to include the install media with that PC if you ever sell/transfer it to another person, or else the license immediately becomes null and void. Ok, then at what point does your original PC no longer become your original PC? If I upgrade motherboard and CPU, is it still my original PC or a new one? How about after I swap hard drives for a new, faster one, upgrade RAM, or put in a new video board? Which piece of my original PC is this OEM software "married to" anyway? At some point, it's possible to upgrade everything on a clone (including the case and power supply!) so it's a whole new computer - yet I doubt even MS would try to say I need to buy Windows again because I made all those hardware changes?
Example #2: Microsoft claims your OEM software can't be legally resold, even if you never opened the shrink-wrap on the media, and reformatted your PC's hard disk as soon as you powered it up - and installed a different OS (like Linux?). This flies directly in the face of "right of first sale", as determined MANY years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. Whether MS likes it or not, you *paid for* that operating system when you purchased your computer. Many companies sell the same exact computer system for varying prices depending on your OS choice, proving this to be the case. If you paid for it and never used it, you quite simply *do* have the legal right to resell it to someone else.
Yes, I just read a story about people using their Blackberries to communicate during the power outage. (May have been an article on Wired's web site?)
Apparently, they use an older wireless network (not cellular towers), so they were still online. I'm guessing it's along the same lines as the wireless Palm PDA's (Palm VII and VIIx) that use a slower packet-switched network.
But see, the "eliteness" expressed by most HAM operators is precisely the thing that turns many of the rest of us off to it.
I once had the opportunity to purchase a hand-held 2 meter HAM radio dirt cheap, and thought I was really going to enjoy getting into a new hobby with it. (I love communications, and already spent a couple years playing around with CB radio.) I quickly decided to forget about it, and sold the portable. The conversations I overheard on it were largely older, retired guys spending hours talking about their latest fishing trip, or doing endless tests as they tried different antenna configurations on home or mobile transmitters.
(In other words, slightly less interesting conversation than I usually heard from the average truckers on CB.)
Despite this, these people seem to think they're really something special, because they took all those exams, paid the required fees to the govt., and now carry various licenses to operate their equipment.
I understand their perceived need to keep the HAM airwaves free of clutter and overuse, but nowdays, I think most people would just use their cellphones and be satisfied. This is still a hobby with plenty of barriers to entry (expense, knowledge required on how to use the equipment, etc.).
I didn't feel like I should have to jump through a bunch of govt. mandated hoops just to use a piece of radio equipment I already purchased. (And man, it's annoying hearing people always announcing their HAM callsigns!)
Sorry, but it wasn't for me. And by calling CB radio "a toy", you further illustrate my point about HAM's attitude problems. CB radio is certainly not just a toy. In fact, where I live, a local AM radio station monitors CB channel 9 for anyone asking for emergency help, and patches you through to the fire/police/ambulance as needed. It serves a very useful purpose.
You're exactly right, and I think it's worth taking a long, hard look at just *why* our government feels a need to keep tabs on where its citizens are.
The "standard" line of reasoning basically says they want your current address because they need to be able to bill you for their services (income tax).
If, however, you're unemployed and don't have a physical address, you're by definition not a taxable citizen. Therefore, any "tracking" the govt. wants to do to these folks is for their own information-gathering purposes - and doesn't seem necessary to me at all.
As you pointed out, there's also the (very likely) ulterior motive of trying to skew the statistics in their favor, while saving money on paying for care for folks insisting on remaining anonymous.
As for the unemployment rate statistics, they're not really useful as anything more than a relative indicator of economic health. Consider this, though. Even those who turned to the "black or grey market" to scrape out a living are aiding the economy. They're providing goods or services (however questionably legal), and collecting money in exchange for those goods/services. Therefore, they cause others to spend some of their cash, which gives them incentive to keep working to earn more money to replace what was spent. The biggest thing that kills the economy is stagnation. The folks who have money are afraid to spend it, so the folks who don't have it find it very hard to get it.
No, but maybe people are missing my point. These vendors are generally NOT advertising that the drives are "OEM" at all. They're simply selling the drives with specs on the make and model, with no additional info.
(Sometimes, you can indirectly figure out what they're doing because they'll offer the same drive at two different prices - and the higher-priced one says something in the description about coming in "retail packaging with mounting rails and screws".)
One shouldn't really have to order a drive in a retail box with complete instruction manul for "newbies", mounting rails, EIDE cable and mounting screws, just to be sure they get a warranty on the drive. There's such a thing as just ordering a "bare drive", and still expecting it's covered by a standard manufacturer's warranty. The "scam" comes into play when the drive is actually pulled out of a complete system made by Dell, Compaq/HP, or whoever, and the serial number is specifically listed in the manufacturer's database as one not to honor any direct warranty returns on.
Yes, I couldn't have expressed it any better myself! Many people of strong religious belief don't even seem to grasp the idea that people could have a strong "moral code" without the aid of organized religion.
Perhaps, organized religion itself is to blame for some of this. I suspect (at least in some cases), they try to push the idea that religion is required to "give morality to people".
Personally, I found it rather obvious, upon giving the matter some real thought, that morality/ethics are a concept much more basic than organized religion. They're simply a matter of taking a little responsibility for one's own decsions and actions, and realizing that co-operation with others has a net positive benefit for one-self in the long run.
That whole "5 degrees of Kevin Bacon" game should give doubters some pause. There's a real good chance that the random person you scam/screw over is somehow linked to one of your good friends or relatives!
I know some folks will dismiss me as way off base here, but I've come to believe these types of "efficiency studies" are total B.S.
Here's why: Even if someones does accurately measure the time spent opening/using/saving files in a Windows environment vs. a Linux environment (ensuring equivalent hardware for both tests), factors in number of reboots, and everything else - the results will mean little to nothing in the real corporate environment.
While a computer might be executing code non-stop, as fast as its given new tasks to process, people don't function that way. When someone has to stop what they're doing/thinking about doing due to something like a system reboot, their train of thought gets temporarily lost. They tend to use this time as an opportunity to "switch gears" and do other tasks that need doing. (Maybe it's as basic as going to the restroom or grabbing a drink of water? Maybe it's a matter of getting some RMA shipments ready for the UPS driver to pick up? Whatever....)
My point is, management shouldn't be making decisions on which OS to run based on these time/efficieny studies, because it's a flawed concept. Computers *should* perform quickly enough that using the software doesn't feel like a fight of "user vs. sluggish PC", but beyond that - counting seconds saved doing basic file operations is too nit-picky. You might as well make rules forcing employees to always walk the shortest path back from any printer or copier to their desk, or supervise everyone to ensure they're using every possible keyboard shortcut, rather than waste "precious time" finding options on pull-down menus and clicking them!
The thing is, most sellers *are* and will continue to be honest. For starters, a given percentage of the population has religious reasons to "do the right thing". Another percentage takes a certain pride in their reputation as a "fair and honest guy/gal", and that extends to "cyberspace" as well as the real world. Still others are just plain scared of potential consequences of their actions if they rip people off continuously.
For these reasons, I don't ever see the status-quo of "most sellers are honest" really changing much on eBay. The scammer's worst enemy has always been the customer he/she ripped off... not the service allowing him/her to advertise the scam. Sure, we'd all like to see eBay get more aggressive in controlling fraud, but in reality, they're much like the classified ads in your local newspaper. How much time and effort could you see your local paper putting into prosecuting fraudulent advertising in their classified ads? Probably not a whole heck of a lot, right? The perpretrators would much more likely get caught because of a few very pissed off people who got scammed, and make the effort to get it investigated.
One scam I've noticed on the real low-priced vendors selling IDE hard drives via Pricewatch is selling either OEM drives, intended only for use as part of a name-brand PC, or selling the drives received as RMA replacements from defective drives.
Many people don't realize it, but whenever you send off a hard drive that's under warranty for RMA replacement, your replacement drive you get back is only warrantied for the remainder of the warranty the original unit had. Some vendors will sell these replacements as new stock, yet their factory warranty may only be 4 or 5 months long!
They also try selling the drives originally destined for OEM system builds as though they're normal drives for end-users. I got burned on a Western Digital 100GB 8MB cache drive like this not long ago. It worked for a few months and started developing bad sectors. I figured "No problem. I'll RMA it to Western Digital." When I keyed in the drive's serial number, it rejected it as an OEM drive I couldn't directly exchange. (I would have to go through the OEM vendor who sold me my system, it said.)
Yes, your friend is quite correct. Regarding those power supplies on the Powerbooks though - I think some of the problem has more to do with how they're handled by the users.
From what I've read and observed, the most common issue is the thin, somewhat fragile cable with the barrel plug on the end (that goes into the notebook itself) gets twisted and stretched/flexed until the wires inside break. When this happens, sometimes they short together, causing the power supply to burn out or in a worse-case scenario, possibly even catch fire.
If people were a little more careful with their AC adapters (and didn't insist on wrapping the cords around the power "brick" tightly, stressing the wires in the cables - they would probably get much better service out of their adapters.
Apple didn't exactly show much interest in helping reduce the problem though. (Last I heard, they added a 3 prong plug to the adapters instead of a non-grounded 2 prong plug. That might save their butt in a lawsuit over someone getting shocked on a shorted power adapter - but it's not nearly as good as using better, thicker wire that won't break as easily!)
Well, once again, we're dealing with a manufacturer making false claims about their software. There are "truth in advertising" laws - but they sure haven't traditionally been enforced when it comes to software packages!
In fact, I'm not sure they've ever really been used against a vendor selling a popular package bought off the store shelf? Whenever I see this type of thing happen at all, it usually has to do with very expensive business apps, custom-tailored for a company. Then, the lawsuit ends up being over the implementation of the package (ERP software, CRM software, and so on) for that *one* customer. They continue selling the buggy, slipshod packages to all other takers afterwards.....
If they want to be so tough on software piracy, you'd think it should work equally in the other direction. Make sure the consumer really gets what he/she paid for!
How do you come up with the "formula" that you should see 1 virus for other platforms for every 20 developed for Windows?
If Windows has a 90% marketshare, that doesn't mean the alternatives will automatically have some directly relative percentage of virii targeted at them.
It's more complex than that. I propose that Microsoft, being as large as they are (and supposedly, a monopoly too, right?), have made far more enemies than the developers of alternative OS products. Look how many virii contain anti-MS messages inside them! They're purposely trying to punch holes in the MS products because they're the "standard".
It isn't as simple as a virus writer saying "Hmm... what does my workplace use? Oh, we run Linux? Ok then, a Linux virus it will be!"
Yes, and no. For one thing, Microsoft OS based systems have the lion's share of the market, so people wanting to inflict damage/do harm by coding a virus are going to do the logical thing and target a Microsoft OS.
If 95% of the desktops and servers were Linux-based, I really do believe you'd see more Linux security flaws exposed and taken advantage of. (No, I don't think Linux is nearly as "slapped together" as most MS code. No, I don't think it's going to be as "insecure". But yes, I do think it currently benefits from far fewer hackers having an interest in discovering and exploiting flaws in it.)
Also, I'm not really certain how many of Microsoft's security issues are due to recently-created portions of their code, as opposed to flaws in older code that finally got fixed? Quite a few of the security patches deal with code that's at least 3+ years old. (Anything for Windows '98, for example.) Once the bad code was developed and put out there, the only options are to ignore it, or release update patches. To Microsoft's credit, they are actively patching things.
If this rate of security flaw finding continues with the current code they're releasing, then folks *do* have a right to complain, long and loud, that MS has *NOT* made good on their promises to take security more seriously. Right now, I think maybe it's still too early to tell if that's the case or not? All I can say is "Here's hoping they keep up those patches, to iron out the old/buggy stuff."
While I understand what you're saying, I think credit cards have been overrated in recent years for providing "consumer protection". The credit card companies love it when people spread around the notion that "buying with cash leaves you with no recourse if the product isn't as advertised". There are plenty of laws governing these issues - and your main issue when using cash is making sure you get (and hold onto) your receipts!
You have to really read the fie print on your credit card policy too. I had a corporate American Express card one time that didn't offer the purchaser any extra recourse if he/she was sold a faulty product, or something arrived that wasn't what was ordered. It stated right in the policy that these issues were strictly between the purchaser and the merchant!
Honestly, what I've seen is quite a bit of mentality of "even though this site asks me to subscribe, it works good enough for me without paying - and they're obviously profiting off enough other people to keep it viable anyway".
(I'm very much guilty of this attitude myself.)
It seems to me, especially with web sites offering really "niche" information, they do better by offering everything free - but occasionally begging for donations. Giving people the "sob story" of "We can't afford to keep paying for our bandwidth unless we raise at least X by next month." seems to get regular users to fork over some cash. (Even better if it's made as easy as clicking a "Pay me now with PayPal!" type of button on the main page.)
The trick is, do it like a traditional fund raiser. Show the users regular, real-time updates of the total amount earned, and the goal you're trying to reach. People are much more likely to pay if they can actually see their contribution push a number closer to a target.
I completely agree! When I started realizing how many different platforms he has this OS running on, it hit me that this might finally allow cross-platform compatibility on all of these classic 8-bit systems that always wished for it, and never got it in their heyday.
In a strange way, it's almost like completing unfinished business from the 80's!
I'll be perfectly honest with you.... I'm very much one of those folks you describe, except I do think I created rather nice-looking business cards for myself.
After wasting my time and money on an Associates' Degree at the local community college (started out thinking I wanted to pursue a Comp. Sci. degree, but became disillusioned when I realized it was mostly a math degree by another name -- switched to Communication Arts, and then bailed out on the whole thing) - I started doing what I was really good at and enjoyed; fixing, selling, upgrading, and troubleshooting computers.
It's been about 10 years since then, and I'm still working with computers. I went from the technician and sales jobs at the "mom and pop" stores to 6 years of working in corporate I.T., and now I'm working for a really small start-up that recycles old Apple Macs as kids' machines, and offers on-site service for PCs and Macs.
On the weekends, I sell my own home-built systems, do repair/troubleshooting, and the occasional service calls while I try to get my own business going from booths at area flea markets.
Maybe I'd be earning more money in some management role by now if I finished school..... or maybe not. All I know is I'm doing what I feel my "calling" in life is. I'm damn good at getting people's computer problems solved, selling them competitively priced used or new systems, and teaching them how to be a little more productive with the systems they've got.
It really is a saturated market, but it's mostly filled with wanna-be's.... I see people all the time making a little quick cash reselling OEM copies of Windows 2000 or XP, some used DVD-ROM or CDRW drives pulled from systems, or what have you. Eventually, they give up because the going gets tough when they actually start getting questions from the customers on what they sold them....
Most of the "consultants" running around these days haven't even used computers long enough to have a good grasp on the history of them. (Many a time, I've seen them argue that anyone putting a modem on IRQ 3 or IRQ 4 was incorrectling configuring it. Umm.... nope. This was the standard setup back in the 286/386/486 days, when you didn't have the ability to share IRQs and there weren't enough to go around for fully loaded systems!)
I started out with a computer with 2K of RAM and a cassette drive, so I think I've got the "history" down better than many "consultants". After all this time invested in it, I can't see doing anything else - even if the money isn't really in this area.
The folks wanting to strip U.S. citizens of their right to keep and bear arms probably forget (or neglect) the fact that it's the last line of defense we have against police-state tactics.
EG. Even if the law has decided that they're going to make it "ok" for cops to sneak into your home, unannounced, and go snooping around, if they have "probable cause" to believe you're doing something illegal - the fact that you might just have a loaded weapon handy for self-defense will deter police from making such bold moves. (If you're a cop, you're probably going to value your own life enough to say, "Hey, the law says I *can* do this, but it doesn't mean I think it's a smart idea. For my own safety's sake, I'd rather announce my presence instead of sneaking into this guy's house at night."
No, not necessarily. You're mingling two very different things as though they were one and the same.
I have no argument that law firms are businesses, like any other business. But typical businesses provide a product and/or a service for a certain price, paid for by the purchaser - and that's all there is to it. They "sink or swim" purely based on the perceived usefulness and desireability of the product or service offered.
Lawyers not only do this (by billing clients their hourly fees), but stand to be handed huge sums of additional money when cases are settled, simply based on some sort of raw percentage of a total fine accessed by the court. This is why the talk of "limits on legal fees" has some validity. There's no sensible argument to make for restricting the dollar amount a lawyer is allowed to bill for his/her work, when he/she is working for a particular client.
The problem is, class-action suits are a strange beast. All of the settlement members get involved without paying any legal fees whatsoever. Then, it's practically a field day for lawyers - who could basically end up with 90% of any settlement won, making the settlement members mere pawns in the lawyers' plan to make some big cash for themselves.
The idea of class action suits was to give people collective power to deal with situations where they were wronged. Currently, it seems lawyers have turned it around into a situation where they spend some money to round up as many interested people as possible, so they can use those names as leverage to get themselves a big pay raise (and then throw those folks some token leftovers).
Well, if you're anything like me, I generally found math very frustrating and difficult, largely because there's so much memorization involved - and then to compound things, all the practice exercises don't give me much sense of reward or accomplishment.
I'm not very good at memorizing things anyway. (I can't even imagine having to work as an actor or actress for a living, for example - unless I was only given bit parts.) With math, you can spend so much time and effort scribbling down rows and columns of numbers, and what's it all for? You end up with another lousy number. Then, when you check an answer key and realize it's not correct - UGH! It just makes me want to give up on the whole thing right then and there.
To me, tracking down where you made a mistake is incredibly tedious and *boring*. One mis-placed parenthesis can get everything thrown off in a calculation - and it's not like writing software, where your compiler/debugger gives you some assistance with color-coding and pointing out exactly where syntax errors are.
My father, who teaches math and physics for a living, once said that math isn't really any "fun" until you get pretty far advanced in it, past all the pre-calc and algebra, etc. etc. I think I understand that statement, as I think more about it. Only when you get deep enough into it do you start really gaining an ability to solve real-world problems with it, making it rewarding.
I agree with you 100%. There' s much value in the realization that Linux is an operating system undergoing constant change and input from many, many developers - all with their own unique ideas about what the OS still needs.
In the end though, the process must result in a "product" - even if the product is really just a snapshot in time of the development going on. Otherwise, you'd just have thousands of people writing code for the sake of learning/enjoyment/self-fulfillment, and not ending up with a single usable OS that "end users" could install and run.
Yeah, the B.S. you mentioned happens ALL THE TIME in corporate America. I hate it, despise it, loathe it, and am tired of living it. That's why I'm working for a real small business literally running out of a guy's garage, and I'm working weekends on getting my own PC sales/repair/consulting business off the ground.
In the long run, I get little job satisfaction from an employer that's too brain-dead to care about my actual productivity, and only wants to see my physical presence between set hours.
I'm the type of person who is willing to put in much more than the standard "40 hour week" if it means a tangible financial return on my time investment. I won't do it for people who don't care or act like it's "just expected of me".
Someone asked why I wanted to work on that training video at home? Well - I have better equipment for doing so at home than my boss has where I work. Why fight his outdated hardware and poor quality video camera, when I own better and faster stuff? Besides, I'm more comfortable working on this type of project as inspiration hits me. I might be up at 1AM and suddenly get a great idea for a segment I want to put in. I don't want to feel constrained by only being able to do what I think of during business hours (while being interrupted by other things going on in the company).
Any "reputable" local computer shop feeding you that line about having to "show your Windows license" before selling you a PC with no OS is simply trying to be difficult on purpose, with intentions of selling more operating systems.
(What? You can't prove you already own a legal copy of Windows? Well, this nice new system we already configured and built for you here, with that 50% up-front deposit you paid that's non-refundable isn't gonna get sold to you then, unless you pay our price for a copy of XP Pro!)
I build new systems and refurbish used ones for sale all the time, and there's absolutely no reason I'd care about which OS the purchaser ends up using with it. That's his/her problem. I simply sell the hardware. In fact, any vendor that tries to bribe me into buying discounted hardware by bundling it with OEM software licenses, I steer clear of. I've worked for too many computer stores in the past that got screwed when their stock of unsold OEM operating systems devalued, when MS released a newer, better OS to replace it. (How much demand do you suppose there is for Windows 3.5.1 Server, for example?)
Though I've known this for a long time, it keeps hitting home every weekend as I travel to a small town flea market and sell used systems + offer cheap system repair and troubleshooting.
Most people out there simply want to buy a computer that runs "all the stuff I run across on the store shelves". I've tried selling perfectly good used PowerMac systems and run into this, just like I run into this if I have Linux pre-loaded on a PC that I put up for sale.
You find roughly 1 in 100 people who praise the fact that you're using Linux (or a Mac for that matter), and they typically spend the next 5 or 10 minutes chatting with you about the superiority of your choice, etc. Then they walk off without buying. (They've already got plenty of computer stuff at home.)
To the general public, Linux being "ready for the desktop" simply means it'll easily let them install and run all the "bargain bin" software on CD-ROM they picked up at Costco or WalMart, their copy of Microsoft Office they paid hundreds of dollars for a few years ago, and they really want to buy after they get their new computer.
This is, ultimately, why Linux won't ultimately be ready for "the desktop" for years and years, if ever. Apple still can't seem to pull off even a consistent 5% market share, and they have hundreds of commercially available software titles!
Slashdot Mirror
That's not too uncommon.
Microsoft Office X for the Macintosh goes out over the local LAN and makes sure no other Macs on the network are running Office X with a matching registration key.
Cheyenne's ArcServe product does this too, last time I worked with it. It even checks your WAN for installations at remote sites that are sharing the same license key, and keeps popping up warning dialog boxes to that effect if it finds any.
Quite annoying and intrusive, and makes me want to choose alternate products when it happens - but still not as bad as reporting IP info to the software publisher via the Internet!
Well, saying it's "ILLEGAL to ghost a PC for which you only have an OEM license" isn't quite accurate.
Microsoft wanted everyone to believe that was the case, a couple years ago - when they really started trying to enforce new and (supposedly) existing rules on what someone could/couldn't do with OEM software. A huge corporate backlash caused them to quickly quiet down on the issue, however - and the legality has never been court tested.
In fact, almost all of the restrictions MS claims are in effect for your OEM software (vs. a retail license) are questionably enforceable by law. Too many folks are just accepting Microsoft's claims at face value and not fighting them.
Example #1: MS says your OEM operating system shipped with your new PC is effectively "married" to that system, and is not for resale or installation on any other PC. You're supposed to include the install media with that PC if you ever sell/transfer it to another person, or else the license immediately becomes null and void. Ok, then at what point does your original PC no longer become your original PC? If I upgrade motherboard and CPU, is it still my original PC or a new one? How about after I swap hard drives for a new, faster one, upgrade RAM, or put in a new video board? Which piece of my original PC is this OEM software "married to" anyway? At some point, it's possible to upgrade everything on a clone (including the case and power supply!) so it's a whole new computer - yet I doubt even MS would try to say I need to buy Windows again because I made all those hardware changes?
Example #2: Microsoft claims your OEM software can't be legally resold, even if you never opened the shrink-wrap on the media, and reformatted your PC's hard disk as soon as you powered it up - and installed a different OS (like Linux?). This flies directly in the face of "right of first sale", as determined MANY years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. Whether MS likes it or not, you *paid for* that operating system when you purchased your computer. Many companies sell the same exact computer system for varying prices depending on your OS choice, proving this to be the case. If you paid for it and never used it, you quite simply *do* have the legal right to resell it to someone else.
Yes, I just read a story about people using their Blackberries to communicate during the power outage. (May have been an article on Wired's web site?)
Apparently, they use an older wireless network (not cellular towers), so they were still online. I'm guessing it's along the same lines as the wireless Palm PDA's (Palm VII and VIIx) that use a slower packet-switched network.
But see, the "eliteness" expressed by most HAM operators is precisely the thing that turns many of the rest of us off to it.
I once had the opportunity to purchase a hand-held 2 meter HAM radio dirt cheap, and thought I was really going to enjoy getting into a new hobby with it. (I love communications, and already spent a couple years playing around with CB radio.) I quickly decided to forget about it, and sold the portable. The conversations I overheard on it were largely older, retired guys spending hours talking about their latest fishing trip, or doing endless tests as they tried different antenna configurations on home or mobile transmitters.
(In other words, slightly less interesting conversation than I usually heard from the average truckers on CB.)
Despite this, these people seem to think they're really something special, because they took all those exams, paid the required fees to the govt., and now carry various licenses to operate their equipment.
I understand their perceived need to keep the HAM airwaves free of clutter and overuse, but nowdays, I think most people would just use their cellphones and be satisfied. This is still a hobby with plenty of barriers to entry (expense, knowledge required on how to use the equipment, etc.).
I didn't feel like I should have to jump through a bunch of govt. mandated hoops just to use a piece of radio equipment I already purchased. (And man, it's annoying hearing people always announcing their HAM callsigns!)
Sorry, but it wasn't for me. And by calling CB radio "a toy", you further illustrate my point about HAM's attitude problems. CB radio is certainly not just a toy. In fact, where I live, a local AM radio station monitors CB channel 9 for anyone asking for emergency help, and patches you through to the fire/police/ambulance as needed. It serves a very useful purpose.
You're exactly right, and I think it's worth taking a long, hard look at just *why* our government feels a need to keep tabs on where its citizens are.
The "standard" line of reasoning basically says they want your current address because they need to be able to bill you for their services (income tax).
If, however, you're unemployed and don't have a physical address, you're by definition not a taxable citizen. Therefore, any "tracking" the govt. wants to do to these folks is for their own information-gathering purposes - and doesn't seem necessary to me at all.
As you pointed out, there's also the (very likely) ulterior motive of trying to skew the statistics in their favor, while saving money on paying for care for folks insisting on remaining anonymous.
As for the unemployment rate statistics, they're not really useful as anything more than a relative indicator of economic health. Consider this, though. Even those who turned to the "black or grey market" to scrape out a living are aiding the economy. They're providing goods or services (however questionably legal), and collecting money in exchange for those goods/services. Therefore, they cause others to spend some of their cash, which gives them incentive to keep working to earn more money to replace what was spent. The biggest thing that kills the economy is stagnation. The folks who have money are afraid to spend it, so the folks who don't have it find it very hard to get it.
No, but maybe people are missing my point. These vendors are generally NOT advertising that the drives are "OEM" at all. They're simply selling the drives with specs on the make and model, with no additional info.
(Sometimes, you can indirectly figure out what they're doing because they'll offer the same drive at two different prices - and the higher-priced one says something in the description about coming in "retail packaging with mounting rails and screws".)
One shouldn't really have to order a drive in a retail box with complete instruction manul for "newbies", mounting rails, EIDE cable and mounting screws, just to be sure they get a warranty on the drive. There's such a thing as just ordering a "bare drive", and still expecting it's covered by a standard manufacturer's warranty. The "scam" comes into play when the drive is actually pulled out of a complete system made by Dell, Compaq/HP, or whoever, and the serial number is specifically listed in the manufacturer's database as one not to honor any direct warranty returns on.
Yes, I couldn't have expressed it any better myself! Many people of strong religious belief don't even seem to grasp the idea that people could have a strong "moral code" without the aid of organized religion.
Perhaps, organized religion itself is to blame for some of this. I suspect (at least in some cases), they try to push the idea that religion is required to "give morality to people".
Personally, I found it rather obvious, upon giving the matter some real thought, that morality/ethics are a concept much more basic than organized religion. They're simply a matter of taking a little responsibility for one's own decsions and actions, and realizing that co-operation with others has a net positive benefit for one-self in the long run.
That whole "5 degrees of Kevin Bacon" game should give doubters some pause. There's a real good chance that the random person you scam/screw over is somehow linked to one of your good friends or relatives!
I know some folks will dismiss me as way off base here, but I've come to believe these types of "efficiency studies" are total B.S.
Here's why: Even if someones does accurately measure the time spent opening/using/saving files in a Windows environment vs. a Linux environment (ensuring equivalent hardware for both tests), factors in number of reboots, and everything else - the results will mean little to nothing in the real corporate environment.
While a computer might be executing code non-stop, as fast as its given new tasks to process, people don't function that way. When someone has to stop what they're doing/thinking about doing due to something like a system reboot, their train of thought gets temporarily lost. They tend to use this time as an opportunity to "switch gears" and do other tasks that need doing. (Maybe it's as basic as going to the restroom or grabbing a drink of water? Maybe it's a matter of getting some RMA shipments ready for the UPS driver to pick up? Whatever....)
My point is, management shouldn't be making decisions on which OS to run based on these time/efficieny studies, because it's a flawed concept. Computers *should* perform quickly enough that using the software doesn't feel like a fight of "user vs. sluggish PC", but beyond that - counting seconds saved doing basic file operations is too nit-picky. You might as well make rules forcing employees to always walk the shortest path back from any printer or copier to their desk, or supervise everyone to ensure they're using every possible keyboard shortcut, rather than waste "precious time" finding options on pull-down menus and clicking them!
The thing is, most sellers *are* and will continue to be honest. For starters, a given percentage of the population has religious reasons to "do the right thing". Another percentage takes a certain pride in their reputation as a "fair and honest guy/gal", and that extends to "cyberspace" as well as the real world. Still others are just plain scared of potential consequences of their actions if they rip people off continuously.
... not the service allowing him/her to advertise the scam. Sure, we'd all like to see eBay get more aggressive in controlling fraud, but in reality, they're much like the classified ads in your local newspaper. How much time and effort could you see your local paper putting into prosecuting fraudulent advertising in their classified ads? Probably not a whole heck of a lot, right? The perpretrators would much more likely get caught because of a few very pissed off people who got scammed, and make the effort to get it investigated.
For these reasons, I don't ever see the status-quo of "most sellers are honest" really changing much on eBay. The scammer's worst enemy has always been the customer he/she ripped off
One scam I've noticed on the real low-priced vendors selling IDE hard drives via Pricewatch is selling either OEM drives, intended only for use as part of a name-brand PC, or selling the drives received as RMA replacements from defective drives.
Many people don't realize it, but whenever you send off a hard drive that's under warranty for RMA replacement, your replacement drive you get back is only warrantied for the remainder of the warranty the original unit had. Some vendors will sell these replacements as new stock, yet their factory warranty may only be 4 or 5 months long!
They also try selling the drives originally destined for OEM system builds as though they're normal drives for end-users. I got burned on a Western Digital 100GB 8MB cache drive like this not long ago. It worked for a few months and started developing bad sectors. I figured "No problem. I'll RMA it to Western Digital." When I keyed in the drive's serial number, it rejected it as an OEM drive I couldn't directly exchange. (I would have to go through the OEM vendor who sold me my system, it said.)
Yes, your friend is quite correct. Regarding those power supplies on the Powerbooks though - I think some of the problem has more to do with how they're handled by the users.
From what I've read and observed, the most common issue is the thin, somewhat fragile cable with the barrel plug on the end (that goes into the notebook itself) gets twisted and stretched/flexed until the wires inside break. When this happens, sometimes they short together, causing the power supply to burn out or in a worse-case scenario, possibly even catch fire.
If people were a little more careful with their AC adapters (and didn't insist on wrapping the cords around the power "brick" tightly, stressing the wires in the cables - they would probably get much better service out of their adapters.
Apple didn't exactly show much interest in helping reduce the problem though. (Last I heard, they added a 3 prong plug to the adapters instead of a non-grounded 2 prong plug. That might save their butt in a lawsuit over someone getting shocked on a shorted power adapter - but it's not nearly as good as using better, thicker wire that won't break as easily!)
Well, once again, we're dealing with a manufacturer making false claims about their software. There are "truth in advertising" laws - but they sure haven't traditionally been enforced when it comes to software packages!
In fact, I'm not sure they've ever really been used against a vendor selling a popular package bought off the store shelf? Whenever I see this type of thing happen at all, it usually has to do with very expensive business apps, custom-tailored for a company. Then, the lawsuit ends up being over the implementation of the package (ERP software, CRM software, and so on) for that *one* customer. They continue selling the buggy, slipshod packages to all other takers afterwards.....
If they want to be so tough on software piracy, you'd think it should work equally in the other direction. Make sure the consumer really gets what he/she paid for!
How do you come up with the "formula" that you should see 1 virus for other platforms for every 20 developed for Windows?
If Windows has a 90% marketshare, that doesn't mean the alternatives will automatically have some directly relative percentage of virii targeted at them.
It's more complex than that. I propose that Microsoft, being as large as they are (and supposedly, a monopoly too, right?), have made far more enemies than the developers of alternative OS products. Look how many virii contain anti-MS messages inside them! They're purposely trying to punch holes in the MS products because they're the "standard".
It isn't as simple as a virus writer saying "Hmm... what does my workplace use? Oh, we run Linux? Ok then, a Linux virus it will be!"
Yes, and no. For one thing, Microsoft OS based systems have the lion's share of the market, so people wanting to inflict damage/do harm by coding a virus are going to do the logical thing and target a Microsoft OS.
If 95% of the desktops and servers were Linux-based, I really do believe you'd see more Linux security flaws exposed and taken advantage of. (No, I don't think Linux is nearly as "slapped together" as most MS code. No, I don't think it's going to be as "insecure". But yes, I do think it currently benefits from far fewer hackers having an interest in discovering and exploiting flaws in it.)
Also, I'm not really certain how many of Microsoft's security issues are due to recently-created portions of their code, as opposed to flaws in older code that finally got fixed? Quite a few of the security patches deal with code that's at least 3+ years old. (Anything for Windows '98, for example.) Once the bad code was developed and put out there, the only options are to ignore it, or release update patches. To Microsoft's credit, they are actively patching things.
If this rate of security flaw finding continues with the current code they're releasing, then folks *do* have a right to complain, long and loud, that MS has *NOT* made good on their promises to take security more seriously. Right now, I think maybe it's still too early to tell if that's the case or not? All I can say is "Here's hoping they keep up those patches, to iron out the old/buggy stuff."
While I understand what you're saying, I think credit cards have been overrated in recent years for providing "consumer protection". The credit card companies love it when people spread around the notion that "buying with cash leaves you with no recourse if the product isn't as advertised". There are plenty of laws governing these issues - and your main issue when using cash is making sure you get (and hold onto) your receipts!
You have to really read the fie print on your credit card policy too. I had a corporate American Express card one time that didn't offer the purchaser any extra recourse if he/she was sold a faulty product, or something arrived that wasn't what was ordered. It stated right in the policy that these issues were strictly between the purchaser and the merchant!
Honestly, what I've seen is quite a bit of mentality of "even though this site asks me to subscribe, it works good enough for me without paying - and they're obviously profiting off enough other people to keep it viable anyway".
(I'm very much guilty of this attitude myself.)
It seems to me, especially with web sites offering really "niche" information, they do better by offering everything free - but occasionally begging for donations. Giving people the "sob story" of "We can't afford to keep paying for our bandwidth unless we raise at least X by next month." seems to get regular users to fork over some cash. (Even better if it's made as easy as clicking a "Pay me now with PayPal!" type of button on the main page.)
The trick is, do it like a traditional fund raiser. Show the users regular, real-time updates of the total amount earned, and the goal you're trying to reach. People are much more likely to pay if they can actually see their contribution push a number closer to a target.
I completely agree! When I started realizing how many different platforms he has this OS running on, it hit me that this might finally allow cross-platform compatibility on all of these classic 8-bit systems that always wished for it, and never got it in their heyday.
In a strange way, it's almost like completing unfinished business from the 80's!
I'll be perfectly honest with you.... I'm very much one of those folks you describe, except I do think I created rather nice-looking business cards for myself.
After wasting my time and money on an Associates' Degree at the local community college (started out thinking I wanted to pursue a Comp. Sci. degree, but became disillusioned when I realized it was mostly a math degree by another name -- switched to Communication Arts, and then bailed out on the whole thing) - I started doing what I was really good at and enjoyed; fixing, selling, upgrading, and troubleshooting computers.
It's been about 10 years since then, and I'm still working with computers. I went from the technician and sales jobs at the "mom and pop" stores to 6 years of working in corporate I.T., and now I'm working for a really small start-up that recycles old Apple Macs as kids' machines, and offers on-site service for PCs and Macs.
On the weekends, I sell my own home-built systems, do repair/troubleshooting, and the occasional service calls while I try to get my own business going from booths at area flea markets.
Maybe I'd be earning more money in some management role by now if I finished school..... or maybe not. All I know is I'm doing what I feel my "calling" in life is. I'm damn good at getting people's computer problems solved, selling them competitively priced used or new systems, and teaching them how to be a little more productive with the systems they've got.
It really is a saturated market, but it's mostly filled with wanna-be's.... I see people all the time making a little quick cash reselling OEM copies of Windows 2000 or XP, some used DVD-ROM or CDRW drives pulled from systems, or what have you. Eventually, they give up because the going gets tough when they actually start getting questions from the customers on what they sold them....
Most of the "consultants" running around these days haven't even used computers long enough to have a good grasp on the history of them. (Many a time, I've seen them argue that anyone putting a modem on IRQ 3 or IRQ 4 was incorrectling configuring it. Umm.... nope. This was the standard setup back in the 286/386/486 days, when you didn't have the ability to share IRQs and there weren't enough to go around for fully loaded systems!)
I started out with a computer with 2K of RAM and a cassette drive, so I think I've got the "history" down better than many "consultants". After all this time invested in it, I can't see doing anything else - even if the money isn't really in this area.
The folks wanting to strip U.S. citizens of their right to keep and bear arms probably forget (or neglect) the fact that it's the last line of defense we have against police-state tactics.
EG. Even if the law has decided that they're going to make it "ok" for cops to sneak into your home, unannounced, and go snooping around, if they have "probable cause" to believe you're doing something illegal - the fact that you might just have a loaded weapon handy for self-defense will deter police from making such bold moves. (If you're a cop, you're probably going to value your own life enough to say, "Hey, the law says I *can* do this, but it doesn't mean I think it's a smart idea. For my own safety's sake, I'd rather announce my presence instead of sneaking into this guy's house at night."
No, not necessarily. You're mingling two very different things as though they were one and the same.
I have no argument that law firms are businesses, like any other business. But typical businesses provide a product and/or a service for a certain price, paid for by the purchaser - and that's all there is to it. They "sink or swim" purely based on the perceived usefulness and desireability of the product or service offered.
Lawyers not only do this (by billing clients their hourly fees), but stand to be handed huge sums of additional money when cases are settled, simply based on some sort of raw percentage of a total fine accessed by the court. This is why the talk of "limits on legal fees" has some validity. There's no sensible argument to make for restricting the dollar amount a lawyer is allowed to bill for his/her work, when he/she is working for a particular client.
The problem is, class-action suits are a strange beast. All of the settlement members get involved without paying any legal fees whatsoever. Then, it's practically a field day for lawyers - who could basically end up with 90% of any settlement won, making the settlement members mere pawns in the lawyers' plan to make some big cash for themselves.
The idea of class action suits was to give people collective power to deal with situations where they were wronged. Currently, it seems lawyers have turned it around into a situation where they spend some money to round up as many interested people as possible, so they can use those names as leverage to get themselves a big pay raise (and then throw those folks some token leftovers).
Well, if you're anything like me, I generally found math very frustrating and difficult, largely because there's so much memorization involved - and then to compound things, all the practice exercises don't give me much sense of reward or accomplishment.
I'm not very good at memorizing things anyway. (I can't even imagine having to work as an actor or actress for a living, for example - unless I was only given bit parts.) With math, you can spend so much time and effort scribbling down rows and columns of numbers, and what's it all for? You end up with another lousy number. Then, when you check an answer key and realize it's not correct - UGH! It just makes me want to give up on the whole thing right then and there.
To me, tracking down where you made a mistake is incredibly tedious and *boring*. One mis-placed parenthesis can get everything thrown off in a calculation - and it's not like writing software, where your compiler/debugger gives you some assistance with color-coding and pointing out exactly where syntax errors are.
My father, who teaches math and physics for a living, once said that math isn't really any "fun" until you get pretty far advanced in it, past all the pre-calc and algebra, etc. etc.
I think I understand that statement, as I think more about it. Only when you get deep enough into it do you start really gaining an ability to solve real-world problems with it, making it rewarding.
I agree with you 100%. There' s much value in the realization that Linux is an operating system undergoing constant change and input from many, many developers - all with their own unique ideas about what the OS still needs.
In the end though, the process must result in a "product" - even if the product is really just a snapshot in time of the development going on. Otherwise, you'd just have thousands of people writing code for the sake of learning/enjoyment/self-fulfillment, and not ending up with a single usable OS that "end users" could install and run.
Yeah, the B.S. you mentioned happens ALL THE TIME in corporate America. I hate it, despise it, loathe it, and am tired of living it. That's why I'm working for a real small business literally running out of a guy's garage, and I'm working weekends on getting my own PC sales/repair/consulting business off the ground.
In the long run, I get little job satisfaction from an employer that's too brain-dead to care about my actual productivity, and only wants to see my physical presence between set hours.
I'm the type of person who is willing to put in much more than the standard "40 hour week" if it means a tangible financial return on my time investment. I won't do it for people who don't care or act like it's "just expected of me".
Someone asked why I wanted to work on that training video at home? Well - I have better equipment for doing so at home than my boss has where I work. Why fight his outdated hardware and poor quality video camera, when I own better and faster stuff? Besides, I'm more comfortable working on this type of project as inspiration hits me. I might be up at 1AM and suddenly get a great idea for a segment I want to put in. I don't want to feel constrained by only being able to do what I think of during business hours (while being interrupted by other things going on in the company).
Any "reputable" local computer shop feeding you that line about having to "show your Windows license" before selling you a PC with no OS is simply trying to be difficult on purpose, with intentions of selling more operating systems.
(What? You can't prove you already own a legal copy of Windows? Well, this nice new system we already configured and built for you here, with that 50% up-front deposit you paid that's non-refundable isn't gonna get sold to you then, unless you pay our price for a copy of XP Pro!)
I build new systems and refurbish used ones for sale all the time, and there's absolutely no reason I'd care about which OS the purchaser ends up using with it. That's his/her problem. I simply sell the hardware. In fact, any vendor that tries to bribe me into buying discounted hardware by bundling it with OEM software licenses, I steer clear of. I've worked for too many computer stores in the past that got screwed when their stock of unsold OEM operating systems devalued, when MS released a newer, better OS to replace it. (How much demand do you suppose there is for Windows 3.5.1 Server, for example?)
Though I've known this for a long time, it keeps hitting home every weekend as I travel to a small town flea market and sell used systems + offer cheap system repair and troubleshooting.
Most people out there simply want to buy a computer that runs "all the stuff I run across on the store shelves". I've tried selling perfectly good used PowerMac systems and run into this, just like I run into this if I have Linux pre-loaded on a PC that I put up for sale.
You find roughly 1 in 100 people who praise the fact that you're using Linux (or a Mac for that matter), and they typically spend the next 5 or 10 minutes chatting with you about the superiority of your choice, etc. Then they walk off without buying. (They've already got plenty of computer stuff at home.)
To the general public, Linux being "ready for the desktop" simply means it'll easily let them install and run all the "bargain bin" software on CD-ROM they picked up at Costco or WalMart, their copy of Microsoft Office they paid hundreds of dollars for a few years ago, and they really want to buy after they get their new computer.
This is, ultimately, why Linux won't ultimately be ready for "the desktop" for years and years, if ever. Apple still can't seem to pull off even a consistent 5% market share, and they have hundreds of commercially available software titles!