I guess that's a little like PC land, where your 56K modem never really does 56K, your monitor's screen size isn't really quite what it says on the front of the box, and your hard drive's usable capacity is less than the "unformatted capacity" shown on the label. I think for a long time, Sony was even selling 3.5" high-density floppies that said they were "2MB" (format to 1.44MB on the PC though).
AMD was labeling their PC CPUs with a mythical speed number too. So let's face it, we're talking "computer-land" here, not "Apple-land".
You have to remember, Apple doesn't really offer a huge product line like some vendors. They have a core set of laptops, desktops, one type of server product, and several accessories and gadgets (mainly the iPod).
The Apple "Airport Extreme" was the first commercial 802.11g device to market - and Apple did their best to put a "spin" on it that it was somehow their own invention. ("That's right folks... good old Steve J. is bringing you the next insanely great thing. Faster wireless than anyone else offers!") Can't really blame them.... They were the only one willing to stick their neck out and start selling the product at the time. Everyone else waited until Apple had it on the shelves before rushing to release their own.
If people start publically attacking the 802.11g spec now and making it look bad, Apple stands to lose the most from it. They've already built all of their systems with it either integrated inside, or upgradable by expansion board.
I've seen an awful lot of web pages holding very little useful content (mostly stuff I accidently ran into while searching for something else), but they often seem to be put together by students learning HTML, or beginners simply excited they finally have a place they can call their own on the web.
Even if someone writes a page nobody reads, who's to say the learning experience of building it wasn't useful or important? Besides, they're not carved in stone. If the author realizes his/her site isn't getting any page views, he/she can always revise it - and maybe it'll become an excellent site someday.
I think the "marriage" of PDA and cellphone actually makes plenty of sense. I've been using a Kyocera "Smartphone" QCP-6035 for over a year now, and while it's far from the ideal solution - I think it was the closest thing available at the time I purchased it.
The QCP-6035 actually has excellent battery life. (Perhaps some of that stems from the fact the phone itself is on the large side, allowing a fairly good sized battery to fit in it. But in any case, it has standby and talk times greater than many regular cellphones. I can easily go several days without recharging it.)
It also skips the color display, simply providing what basically amounts to Palm VIIx compatibility. (It runs the wireless PQA apps originally intended to only work over Palm's proprietary wireless network, but routes them over the internal modem built into the phone instead.)
The whole "easy to carry" argument against "smartphones" seems a little unfair to me. If you have to carry around *both* your phone *and* a PDA, that's two devices you have to deal with. I'd rather have one larger device than a large and a small one, both of which have to be "managed" (ensure battery life is ok, etc.).
I think they'll always make very nice (and very small) dedicated cellphones for people who simply don't want/need a PDA. Great. For anyone who uses both a cellphone AND a PDA though, the Smartphone combo is the future.
Correct. I'm not a brewmaster, by any stretch of the imagination, but I've talked to enough beer makers to get the idea that Budweiser is the prime example of the "American" style of beer.
You can love it or despise it, but it's a valid *type* of beer, just as a "pale ale" or a "lager" is. Like you said, Bud is technically perfect. It's just often derided because many folks feel the American style of brew sucks, as a whole.
As for the traditional skills being a "waste of time" because they're outdated - I think that's one way to look at it, but it's a rather shallow, tunnel-visioned way. I'm not really motivated to make my own butter or soap, but I have made butter before once, and it gives me a little more insight into how far things have come over the years. It also gives a better appreciation and respect for the little innovations that make mass-production possible today.
Excellent post! I happen to live in a "not so great" neighborhood with relatively high crime. I'm also surrounded by small municipalities that each have their own little police departments. I really want to believe that most of the officers working for them think they're accomplishing something worthwhile, trying to improve the area, etc. In reality though, it seems like they're mostly pawns in a power struggle. The municipalities would all like to expand and take over one or more of the surrounding ones, or snatch up the "unincorporated" area (that I happen to live in), to increase their tax base. The police become a critical cog in that machine because #1, they bring in the revenue the municipalities need to survive by way of tickets/citations, and #2, they aid in propaganda. (EG. Hey Mrs. Jones, we sure are glad we were able to catch that guy who stole your purse a couple weeks ago! Be sure you vote for the annexation when it comes up next month, so we can be sure to get the funding we need to keep up that level of service to you and your neighbors!)
It really doesn't help them earn any respect when they're quite visibly serving as little more than tax collectors in uniform. My friend's truck got broken into, right in front of our house, just recently - and the only reason the police even got interested in seriously investigating was the fact that the crook stole his cellphone and made a number of calls on it to his friends! My friend downloaded the detailed phone call log from the web site and gave it to the police, making it a breeze to look into it. Meanwhile, my wife got pulled over for "flicking her high-beams at an officer" (the guy was parked crooked, half way out in the road, late at night, in the rain - and she wanted to make sure she wasn't going to hit him!). I got ticketed for "parking on an unpaved surface" because 2 wheels of my truck were barely on the edge of my front lawn! I also got ticketed for a rolling stop at a stop sign at the end of my street, and fined over $200 in court costs alone. I just don't feel like the priorities are in the right place here!
You sound like someone that would be a refreshing change to work for! I hope your business prospers.
Regarding your comment about being very, very poor putting things into perspective - I can relate to that, to an extent. But at the same time, I find that money *is* very important in my life, at least up to a certain point. My interests, unfortunately, aren't cheap. I'm a computer junkie, for one. I also like things like movies and music, which do cost money. Beyond that, I have to earn enough to pay for my daughter's needs, and keep all the bills paid for the basics.
I guess what I find frustrating is the seeming lack of a "middle ground" nowdays. It's easy to be poor, as long as your aspirations don't involve many things that cost money. (I see people all the time who get by quite happily on a single $7 or $8 an hour income, for example. They earn a small enough annual income that their insurance needs get covered by state programs. They may even get financial assistance for other basic requirements. They buy what they need at garage sales, flea markets, and from friends/neighbors - and their hobbies usually include the "simple pleasures" like camping, swimming or fishing.)
It's also very possible to be fairly rich, but the tradeoff, as you pointed out, is the rest of your free time (life). The people making money nowdays, by and large, put in crazy numbers of hours, or at least work all the hours traditionally reserved as "family or personal time".
The people who have skills/knowledge to rise far above the "near minimum wage" jobs, yet don't want to take on the responsibilities (typically management positions) that earn the "top dollars" are really struggling. There's hardly any room for these folks anymore. They get downsized, laid off, transferred into other areas where they're forced to move into management roles they don't want, etc.
This is *precisely* the point that needs to get through!
Instead of all the generic name-calling and accusations of "piracy!" - the only way anything useful will get accomplished is to look at the core of the issue.
"Is the current copyright situation in the U.S. workable in today's technological environment, or does it need some adjustment?"
As long as the elected representatives are busy collecting money from software makers and trying to please them, they'll just be trying to bend the existing copyright laws as far as possible in their favor.
Meanwhile, the rest of us might simply be wasting energy bickering over how far they can or can't bend those rules, instead of seeing if the framework itself is flawed. A fundamental change, such as "computer software will not be subject to copyright protection after a term of 5 years" might do *MUCH* more good. (Or perhaps not, but that's what needs debate!)
I've worked for more than one place that initially promised me they "weren't picky about keeping strict hours, as long as you got the work done" -- and each time, reality was a little bit different.
What happens is this: Your co-workers (and superiors) observe you coming in late or leaving early, or heading out for lunch at a non-typical hour, and they automatically assume the worst.
Actually, to be more specific about it - your co-workers actually *in* your department, working along-side you, probably *do* understand if you're getting your job done. The problem is everyone else. They're busy doing their own work, so they don't have time to check what you do. All they notice is your presence or absence.
All it takes to run into "hot water" is an unfounded rumor about your "part-time work habits". Your superiors might not immediately act upon it, but the comments tend to stick in their heads and they'll start looking for reasons to "have a talk with you".
Once the average Internet user learns that unsolicited email should be completely ignored/deleted - the spammers will not see any return on their "investment".
(And sure, they can say spam is great because there's almost no cost to them - but that's a thinly veiled lie! Somebody has to take the time to put together the message content, figure out ever-changing ways to get the junk distributed successfully, and maintain relatively useful collections of valid email addresses. I think in reality, most of the big spammers are making more profit convincing others the whole thing is worthwhile - and then selling them their address lists + spamming tools.)
That's one way of looking at things, I suppose - but I think it's a bit extreme. Yeah, some people might be scared of getting sued, so they aren't speaking their mind on a web site as freely as they'd like. News flash: This happens in print media and TV/radio too!
Show me one form of "mass media" that isn't "owned by the big-boys", for that matter! Is the entire magazine publishing industry "dead", just because a few conglomerates own most of it? It seems to be alive and well to me. Almost everyone I know subscribes to at least one magazine, newspaper, or trade journal!
Of course, one can argue that the old "wild west" Internet was better, with no rules and only the "knowledgeable" putting up servers and sites. Well, fine - but it's irrational to assume any form of mass media can *stay* that way forever. Once it gets popular enough (and accessible enough), sheer volume will tip the scales in favor of a large business handling much of it.
When I hear folks whine about the "death of the net", I think they're usually just longing for the days when only computer nerds/geeks ran it, and it was a mystery to the "rest of the world". Time for them to go invent something completely new then....
It's really all relative. If my only power source is a couple solar cells, then yes - my computer would start to seem like it uses "far too much electricity" for what it does.
On the other hand, it irks me when I get preached to by the eco-crowd about how "wasteful" our technologies are. The fact is, 99% of us in the U.S. *do* live on the power grid, and we do so because it's very cost-effective and economical.
If I leave even 3 or 4 computers running all the time in my house, as opposed to only powering up a single PC when I need it - the cost difference on my monthly electric bill is roughly $5-10. The convenience (files available at all times on the LAN, etc.) is worth the money.
With all the problems I've seen of system crashes due to "power management" functions (sleep, auto power-down on hard drives, etc.) - I have to wonder how much productivity (and money) is lost from it, vs. the energy savings.
I think the bottom line here is, use technologies appropriate for your living conditions. If a 3rd. world country has severe underdevelopment of power generation systems, use tools that have this limitation in mind. Don't try to force those same tools on a 1st. world nation that does have sufficient power generation, though.
While you're absolutely right, one has to also wonder who would actually go to the huge amount of effort required to provide free web sites (updated almost daily, no less!) with good data and benchmarks on all the new hardware.
Of course, the only logical answer that comes to mind is the folks getting some sort of financial benefit/kickback from the hardware manufacturers.
All I'm saying is, perhaps you're being a bit too hard on sites like Tom's Hardware - because "unprofessional" and "inaccurate" as it may be, it's provided for free to the public, and I've seen much worse info that people pay big $'s to receive (cough, Gartner Group, cough).
Like anything you read, you have to consider the source, and take the data with a few grains of salt. I'm far less concerned with benchmark number they publish anyway. All I look for is general information, such as "video cards Y and Z are outperforming A and B by a wide margin, although the new card Q seems to run as slowly as the cards made 2 generations ago".
What you do with your computer *does* make a difference! You seem to quickly discount this as pointless, because you claim you can "do everything with the PC you could do with the Mac".
I disagree with that assumption!
Granted, there is a LOT of crossover with applications. Most of the popular ones are written for both PC and Mac. Still, the Mac has a number of niches the PC isn't quite there with.
I pointed out in a seperate message thread, for example, that for WYSIWYG HTML work, "Freeway" for the Mac blows away anything I've used on a PC. For video editing, many folks think iMovie/iDVD and Final Cut (Express or Pro) are more powerful, stable, and easier to use than the PC counterparts. (I liked them enough that they pretty much sold me on a Mac by themselves!) For music creation, the PC has the edge in some areas (such as ACID Pro for working with sound loops), but not in others. The new Digital Producer 4 (DP4) from MOTU (Mac only) seems to have the edge over anything like it on the PC side. For hard disk recording on the high-end, more professionals use ProTools on a Mac than any single PC alternative I know of.
The PC is also straddled with competing "standards" for plug-ins to MIDI/music packages. Most people seem to agree that Steinberg's VST's are one of the best options, yet many PC packages (such as Cakewalk Sonar) prefer to use DirectX based plug-ins. Going all Mac for a music workstation at least bypasses some of these issues, too.
If you primarily play games on your computer, then a fast PC makes the most sense. If you just use the Internet - then whatever's cheapest that runs a modern browser is probably the best bet. (You simply have more money than sense if you buy a high-end system to do nothing but get email and look at porn on!) For video editing and DVD creation, or MIDI/music work, I think a Mac *may* make the most sense.
Yeah, I tend to agree. I worked as a temp. briefly for a firm that had these chairs (or a very good knockoff of the original, perhaps?) in their I.T. department. I found them to be seemingly extremely comfortable at first, but after sitting in one for an hour or two working on a PC, it felt "limiting". I guess it could be adjusted better - but in the typical office environment, nobody wants to spend 10 minutes playing with chair adjustments. (Heck, as a temp. - all the effort would only go towards that one afternoon's worth of use anyway. By the next day, I'd be sitting at a different cubicle.)
I guess I don't quite follow.... As someone else already asked, what exactly are you trying to accomplish with your machine(s)?
I've been using strictly PCs for 5 years or so now, after a brief stint with a "Performa" Mac mini-tower that didn't turn out too well.
My "high end" PC system is a Pentium 4, 1.8Ghz tower with Promise EIDE RAID and a GeForce 4 video board.
I'm pretty happy with it, but I really wanted a good system to run OS X and some of Apple's incredibly well-done video editing packages (Final Cut, iDVD, etc.). I just broke down and bought a dual-processor G4 1.42Ghz tower. I certainly don't feel it's "slow" at all! I'd say it performs at least on par with my P4 system, if not a little faster at certain tasks. It boots into OS X a lot more quickly than the P4 boots into Windows XP, for one thing.
Sure, the 970 processor will be great -- but the people complaining that the current PowerMacs are "horribly underpowered" must be "benchmark junkies", worried about having the best stats for the sake of stats (bragging rights?).
Like I say, I consider myself very much a "power user", and for a long time, I didn't think Apple really had the "price vs. performance" in the right place on the curve. But with their recent price drops, plus "speed bumps" to their G4 offerings - I think they still have a very competitive setup to tide them over until the 970 is done.
At the end of the day, you don't plunk down $2000-3400 for a "pro" Mac G4 or PowerBook because you're worried about having the "most Ghz". You do so because it offers an OS and specialized applications you can't get in the PC world. (These days, you might also do so to avoid the Microsoft licensing nightmares. A "family pack" of OS X lets you load it on any 5 systems of your choice for a price not much more than 1 single copy of Windows XP Pro, for example.)
I completely agree about saving the taxpayer's money, and re-using these older systems in schools when possible.
As I've noted on/. before, I work for a company that refurbishes old Apple Macs, primarily for use in daycares and schools (but lately, we've sold more to individuals as first computers for their own kids).
We get the occasional donated Apple//c system, but we don't really specialize in going back any further than the original Macs.
The only problem I've seen with the pre-Mac Apples like a//c or//e is the general lack of a hard drive. Floppy disks can and do wear out, and I think it's more practical for schools to have a system that can power up and run all of its intended software without the user intervention of inserting/removing specific disks.
I think using a//e as a dedicated system is a great idea. The dairy example you gave is one such perfectly good use. I've also seen model railroad enthusiasts do similar things with old IBM XT's and Tandy computers. They rig them up so their printer/serial ports send control messages to switch the trains onto different sections of track, control lighting of the model homes and businesses on the layout, etc.
For all around school use, though, I think systems like the Mac LC3 or LC575 are a better option than a//e, and nearly as cheap to get ahold of nowdays.
Your risk vs. reward seems pretty skewed in this case, for one thing. Peng never so much as made a single public statement (much less a promise) that he'll use excess funds to fight the RIAA in the future.
I'd say the "smart money" is on him being scared (plus pressured by his family, etc.) to avoid any possibility of future confrontations with the recording industry.
Any excess funds he gets will probably just go into his pocketbook - never to give you any direct benefit.
I'd prefer to use this as another prime example of a reason to donate to organizations such as the EFF, that already earmark your money to fight worthy causes.
$17K might be a year's tuition to a college kid, but I really don't think this kid's going to end up having to drop out of school over this RIAA mess, nor do I forsee him really paying off the RIAA the full $17,000 any time in the near future.
I, for one, am going to pass on donating to this cause.
The last thing the RIAA wants is for this media show to backfire on them, with a bunch of "investigative reports" on TV of how Peng's life is completely ruined because the RIAA thinks collecting $17,000 from him for aiding in sharing music is more important than the rest of his education.
As the saying goes, you can't "squeeze blood from a turnip" -- but by proving he can actually raise the money via PayPal donations and such, maybe they won't leave him alone after all.
Honestly though, as a homeowner myself, I don't really recommend any of these solutions right now!
When I first bought my house, I had grand plans of automating everything. I was going to install X10 appliance and light controllers everywhere, computerize it all with web access, put speakers everywhere, etc. etc.
Well, it's been almost 5 years now, and the farthest I've gotten is getting a Dolby 5.1 surround sound setup in the living room.
I think once the initial excitement of having a new home wore off, I got much more practical - and realized all that stuff just meant more unnecessary expense, and more things to break down the road. I have enough home-related issues as it is. (A couple years ago, I decided to finish our basement, for example. Even that still isn't done, because as soon as we started on it, I discovered a leak was soaking the wood subfloor in the bathroom. Turns out, we had to rip out the bathroom floor and replace everything, due to a leaky pipe that went unnoticed for too long. The basement remodeling fund turned into a bathroom remodeling fund.)
I haven't felt any urgent need to hear Internet radio in all rooms of the house, anyway. Generally, if I want to hear it in another room, I just turn up my stereo so I can do so. (It's not an apartment complex, where turning up your stereo instantly means complaints from the old folks living just beneath you.....)
At first, I wrote off the idea of archiving video straight to IDE hard drives as "not viable" - simply because I thought of the fact that drives don't typically last more than 3 to 10 years.
On second thought though, that assumes a drive that sees regular use.
If you really used inexpensive IDE drives as though they were pieces of backup media - writing to them once and storing them away someplace safe (and at least somewhat climate controlled, like a bank safe deposit box), I'd bet they'd fire back up ok even after 15+ years of sitting in storage.
The question always becomes, will you still have computers using that standard by the time you need to review them? Nothing's certain, but I don't see why not. There are plenty of old 8088 systems (IBM XT and compatibles) that still boot up and function today, for example. You could even build a cheap PC just for this purpose and store it away someplace safe, along with the drives.
The *cheapest* fix, it seems to me, is just to xfer from your old VHS tape to fresh VHS tape (using the best quality tape possible), and get yourself another 20 some-odd years of storage of your movies.
Not that I really disagree with you, but just for the sake of fairness and reporting all the facts, a new purchase of Windows does give you a little more than just "IE and Wordpad".
They've always included at least a command line ftp command that runs from a DOS command prompt. They include a GUI telnet client as well. They've always included the "Paint" program to edit bitmapped graphics and do simple drawing/doodling.
If you purchase Windows XP, you also get a movie-maker application, as well as the ability to burn files and directories to CD, integrated into the OS. I believe both 2000 and XP include a moderately decent image viewer/editor application as well.
Of course, there are also a number of less important "applets" like the calculator, Windows notepad, the sound recorder utility, and "Character Map" (to make it easy to copy/past a non-standard ASCII character into a file/document).
Any decent Linux distro includes *far* more software than a Windows installation CD does. There's no contest there.... I'm just not sure how important that really is to most buyers?
Don't forget, most of the chain-store bought PCs not only come preloaded with Windows, but also come bundled with loads of commercial packages (things like Quicken, or MS Works, 3D Home Designer, etc.). I've actually had more than one person pay me for my time to come over to their house and *remove* a lot of these packages - because they didn't use the stuff and didn't want it cluttering up their computer anymore.
Right you are, about the blue-collar work not being "all that".
I'll tell you, most blue-collar workers I know make more cash than I.T. people I know (even I.T. managers in some cases, though they're probaby close to equal).
Nonetheless, I've stubbornly stuck with I.T. jobs only, despite the lure of much better pay. Mostly, it's for the reasons you cite. I'm not really fond of working out in the heat and cold, and/or tearing up my body. (Just one hospital stay not covered by insurance could set a person back much further than they got ahead with years of "better pay" in a construction job, for example!)
I've gone back and forth on that whole "tech worker's union" idea though. Right now, I tend to be against it. Unions aren't much loved or respected by most consumers. Heck, I see the unions putting up billboards all the time begging people not to shop at store X or Y because "non-union labor" was used there. Think anyone cares? No way! Those businesses tend to have the best prices/value for the dollar - and that's all the customer ultimately cares about when shopping.
I think you'd see plenty of "non-union techs" competing with the "union techs" for work, and winning the contract every time. What is the union supposed to really offer the customer when it comes to PC repair/upgrades? Certifications? Plenty of people have those already (or can go get them easily enough!). Nah, seems to me they'd just offer people an empty promise of "better quality work" - which they wouldn't really deliver on.
Oh, absolutely. I've been saying this for a while. Here in St. Louis, Missouri - you can find a pretty good-sized list of "I.T. job openings" in the Post Dispatch (or on their stltoday.com web site, if you prefer).
Many of these are from the same company (which I'll refrain from naming) that apparently has a policy of collecting up resumes into an H.R. database well in advance of actually having the advertised openings available. The listings aren't exactly "fake". They're simply for positions they could theoretically have open, if existing employees left.
It probably makes good business sense from their point of view. Why risk missing a superb candidate just because he/she didn't notice the want-ad when they ran it for a few weeks? Instead, get all those people into the database! Then, just search on what you've got when you need somebody, and give them a ring. In today's crappy economy, there's a pretty decent chance they'll still come in for an interview, even if you're calling them 8 or 9 months later than when they first responsed to your listing.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess that's a little like PC land, where your 56K modem never really does 56K, your monitor's screen size isn't really quite what it says on the front of the box, and your hard drive's usable capacity is less than the "unformatted capacity" shown on the label. I think for a long time, Sony was even selling 3.5" high-density floppies that said they were "2MB" (format to 1.44MB on the PC though).
AMD was labeling their PC CPUs with a mythical speed number too. So let's face it, we're talking "computer-land" here, not "Apple-land".
You have to remember, Apple doesn't really offer a huge product line like some vendors. They have a core set of laptops, desktops, one type of server product, and several accessories and gadgets (mainly the iPod).
The Apple "Airport Extreme" was the first commercial 802.11g device to market - and Apple did their best to put a "spin" on it that it was somehow their own invention. ("That's right folks... good old Steve J. is bringing you the next insanely great thing. Faster wireless than anyone else offers!") Can't really blame them.... They were the only one willing to stick their neck out and start selling the product at the time. Everyone else waited until Apple had it on the shelves before rushing to release their own.
If people start publically attacking the 802.11g spec now and making it look bad, Apple stands to lose the most from it. They've already built all of their systems with it either integrated inside, or upgradable by expansion board.
I've seen an awful lot of web pages holding very little useful content (mostly stuff I accidently ran into while searching for something else), but they often seem to be put together by students learning HTML, or beginners simply excited they finally have a place they can call their own on the web.
Even if someone writes a page nobody reads, who's to say the learning experience of building it wasn't useful or important? Besides, they're not carved in stone. If the author realizes his/her site isn't getting any page views, he/she can always revise it - and maybe it'll become an excellent site someday.
I think the "marriage" of PDA and cellphone actually makes plenty of sense. I've been using a Kyocera "Smartphone" QCP-6035 for over a year now, and while it's far from the ideal solution - I think it was the closest thing available at the time I purchased it.
The QCP-6035 actually has excellent battery life. (Perhaps some of that stems from the fact the phone itself is on the large side, allowing a fairly good sized battery to fit in it. But in any case, it has standby and talk times greater than many regular cellphones. I can easily go several days without recharging it.)
It also skips the color display, simply providing what basically amounts to Palm VIIx compatibility. (It runs the wireless PQA apps originally intended to only work over Palm's proprietary wireless network, but routes them over the internal modem built into the phone instead.)
The whole "easy to carry" argument against "smartphones" seems a little unfair to me. If you have to carry around *both* your phone *and* a PDA, that's two devices you have to deal with. I'd rather have one larger device than a large and a small one, both of which have to be "managed" (ensure battery life is ok, etc.).
I think they'll always make very nice (and very small) dedicated cellphones for people who simply don't want/need a PDA. Great. For anyone who uses both a cellphone AND a PDA though, the Smartphone combo is the future.
Correct. I'm not a brewmaster, by any stretch of the imagination, but I've talked to enough beer makers to get the idea that Budweiser is the prime example of the "American" style of beer.
You can love it or despise it, but it's a valid *type* of beer, just as a "pale ale" or a "lager" is. Like you said, Bud is technically perfect. It's just often derided because many folks feel the American style of brew sucks, as a whole.
As for the traditional skills being a "waste of time" because they're outdated - I think that's one way to look at it, but it's a rather shallow, tunnel-visioned way. I'm not really motivated to make my own butter or soap, but I have made butter before once, and it gives me a little more insight into how far things have come over the years. It also gives a better appreciation and respect for the little innovations that make mass-production possible today.
Excellent post! I happen to live in a "not so great" neighborhood with relatively high crime. I'm also surrounded by small municipalities that each have their own little police departments. I really want to believe that most of the officers working for them think they're accomplishing something worthwhile, trying to improve the area, etc. In reality though, it seems like they're mostly pawns in a power struggle. The municipalities would all like to expand and take over one or more of the surrounding ones, or snatch up the "unincorporated" area (that I happen to live in), to increase their tax base. The police become a critical cog in that machine because #1, they bring in the revenue the municipalities need to survive by way of tickets/citations, and #2, they aid in propaganda. (EG. Hey Mrs. Jones, we sure are glad we were able to catch that guy who stole your purse a couple weeks ago! Be sure you vote for the annexation when it comes up next month, so we can be sure to get the funding we need to keep up that level of service to you and your neighbors!)
It really doesn't help them earn any respect when they're quite visibly serving as little more than tax collectors in uniform. My friend's truck got broken into, right in front of our house, just recently - and the only reason the police even got interested in seriously investigating was the fact that the crook stole his cellphone and made a number of calls on it to his friends! My friend downloaded the detailed phone call log from the web site and gave it to the police, making it a breeze to look into it. Meanwhile, my wife got pulled over for "flicking her high-beams at an officer" (the guy was parked crooked, half way out in the road, late at night, in the rain - and she wanted to make sure she wasn't going to hit him!). I got ticketed for "parking on an unpaved surface" because 2 wheels of my truck were barely on the edge of my front lawn! I also got ticketed for a rolling stop at a stop sign at the end of my street, and fined over $200 in court costs alone. I just don't feel like the priorities are in the right place here!
You sound like someone that would be a refreshing change to work for! I hope your business prospers.
Regarding your comment about being very, very poor putting things into perspective - I can relate to that, to an extent. But at the same time, I find that money *is* very important in my life, at least up to a certain point. My interests, unfortunately, aren't cheap. I'm a computer junkie, for one. I also like things like movies and music, which do cost money. Beyond that, I have to earn enough to pay for my daughter's needs, and keep all the bills paid for the basics.
I guess what I find frustrating is the seeming lack of a "middle ground" nowdays. It's easy to be poor, as long as your aspirations don't involve many things that cost money. (I see people all the time who get by quite happily on a single $7 or $8 an hour income, for example. They earn a small enough annual income that their insurance needs get covered by state programs. They may even get financial assistance for other basic requirements. They buy what they need at garage sales, flea markets, and from friends/neighbors - and their hobbies usually include the "simple pleasures" like camping, swimming or fishing.)
It's also very possible to be fairly rich, but the tradeoff, as you pointed out, is the rest of your free time (life). The people making money nowdays, by and large, put in crazy numbers of hours, or at least work all the hours traditionally reserved as "family or personal time".
The people who have skills/knowledge to rise far above the "near minimum wage" jobs, yet don't want to take on the responsibilities (typically management positions) that earn the "top dollars" are really struggling. There's hardly any room for these folks anymore. They get downsized, laid off, transferred into other areas where they're forced to move into management roles they don't want, etc.
This is *precisely* the point that needs to get through!
Instead of all the generic name-calling and accusations of "piracy!" - the only way anything useful will get accomplished is to look at the core of the issue.
"Is the current copyright situation in the U.S. workable in today's technological environment, or does it need some adjustment?"
As long as the elected representatives are busy collecting money from software makers and trying to please them, they'll just be trying to bend the existing copyright laws as far as possible in their favor.
Meanwhile, the rest of us might simply be wasting energy bickering over how far they can or can't bend those rules, instead of seeing if the framework itself is flawed. A fundamental change, such as "computer software will not be subject to copyright protection after a term of 5 years" might do *MUCH* more good. (Or perhaps not, but that's what needs debate!)
I've worked for more than one place that initially promised me they "weren't picky about keeping strict hours, as long as you got the work done" -- and each time, reality was a little bit different.
What happens is this: Your co-workers (and superiors) observe you coming in late or leaving early, or heading out for lunch at a non-typical hour, and they automatically assume the worst.
Actually, to be more specific about it - your co-workers actually *in* your department, working along-side you, probably *do* understand if you're getting your job done. The problem is everyone else. They're busy doing their own work, so they don't have time to check what you do. All they notice is your presence or absence.
All it takes to run into "hot water" is an unfounded rumor about your "part-time work habits". Your superiors might not immediately act upon it, but the comments tend to stick in their heads and they'll start looking for reasons to "have a talk with you".
Bleah... they always give the concept cars to Hollywood types and celebs. Go figure....
The biggest enemy of spam will be education.
Once the average Internet user learns that unsolicited email should be completely ignored/deleted - the spammers will not see any return on their "investment".
(And sure, they can say spam is great because there's almost no cost to them - but that's a thinly veiled lie! Somebody has to take the time to put together the message content, figure out ever-changing ways to get the junk distributed successfully, and maintain relatively useful collections of valid email addresses. I think in reality, most of the big spammers are making more profit convincing others the whole thing is worthwhile - and then selling them their address lists + spamming tools.)
That's one way of looking at things, I suppose - but I think it's a bit extreme. Yeah, some people might be scared of getting sued, so they aren't speaking their mind on a web site as freely as they'd like. News flash: This happens in print media and TV/radio too!
Show me one form of "mass media" that isn't "owned by the big-boys", for that matter! Is the entire magazine publishing industry "dead", just because a few conglomerates own most of it? It seems to be alive and well to me. Almost everyone I know subscribes to at least one magazine, newspaper, or trade journal!
Of course, one can argue that the old "wild west" Internet was better, with no rules and only the "knowledgeable" putting up servers and sites. Well, fine - but it's irrational to assume any form of mass media can *stay* that way forever. Once it gets popular enough (and accessible enough), sheer volume will tip the scales in favor of a large business handling much of it.
When I hear folks whine about the "death of the net", I think they're usually just longing for the days when only computer nerds/geeks ran it, and it was a mystery to the "rest of the world". Time for them to go invent something completely new then....
It's really all relative. If my only power source is a couple solar cells, then yes - my computer would start to seem like it uses "far too much electricity" for what it does.
On the other hand, it irks me when I get preached to by the eco-crowd about how "wasteful" our technologies are. The fact is, 99% of us in the U.S. *do* live on the power grid, and we do so because it's very cost-effective and economical.
If I leave even 3 or 4 computers running all the time in my house, as opposed to only powering up a single PC when I need it - the cost difference on my monthly electric bill is roughly $5-10. The convenience (files available at all times on the LAN, etc.) is worth the money.
With all the problems I've seen of system crashes due to "power management" functions (sleep, auto power-down on hard drives, etc.) - I have to wonder how much productivity (and money) is lost from it, vs. the energy savings.
I think the bottom line here is, use technologies appropriate for your living conditions. If a 3rd. world country has severe underdevelopment of power generation systems, use tools that have this limitation in mind. Don't try to force those same tools on a 1st. world nation that does have sufficient power generation, though.
While you're absolutely right, one has to also wonder who would actually go to the huge amount of effort required to provide free web sites (updated almost daily, no less!) with good data and benchmarks on all the new hardware.
Of course, the only logical answer that comes to mind is the folks getting some sort of financial benefit/kickback from the hardware manufacturers.
All I'm saying is, perhaps you're being a bit too hard on sites like Tom's Hardware - because "unprofessional" and "inaccurate" as it may be, it's provided for free to the public, and I've seen much worse info that people pay big $'s to receive (cough, Gartner Group, cough).
Like anything you read, you have to consider the source, and take the data with a few grains of salt. I'm far less concerned with benchmark number they publish anyway. All I look for is general information, such as "video cards Y and Z are outperforming A and B by a wide margin, although the new card Q seems to run as slowly as the cards made 2 generations ago".
What you do with your computer *does* make a difference! You seem to quickly discount this as pointless, because you claim you can "do everything with the PC you could do with the Mac".
I disagree with that assumption!
Granted, there is a LOT of crossover with applications. Most of the popular ones are written for both PC and Mac. Still, the Mac has a number of niches the PC isn't quite there with.
I pointed out in a seperate message thread, for example, that for WYSIWYG HTML work, "Freeway" for the Mac blows away anything I've used on a PC. For video editing, many folks think iMovie/iDVD and Final Cut (Express or Pro) are more powerful, stable, and easier to use than the PC counterparts. (I liked them enough that they pretty much sold me on a Mac by themselves!) For music creation, the PC has the edge in some areas (such as ACID Pro for working with sound loops), but not in others. The new Digital Producer 4 (DP4) from MOTU (Mac only) seems to have the edge over anything like it on the PC side. For hard disk recording on the high-end, more professionals use ProTools on a Mac than any single PC alternative I know of.
The PC is also straddled with competing "standards" for plug-ins to MIDI/music packages. Most people seem to agree that Steinberg's VST's are one of the best options, yet many PC packages (such as Cakewalk Sonar) prefer to use DirectX based plug-ins. Going all Mac for a music workstation at least bypasses some of these issues, too.
If you primarily play games on your computer, then a fast PC makes the most sense. If you just use the Internet - then whatever's cheapest that runs a modern browser is probably the best bet. (You simply have more money than sense if you buy a high-end system to do nothing but get email and look at porn on!) For video editing and DVD creation, or MIDI/music work, I think a Mac *may* make the most sense.
Yeah, I tend to agree. I worked as a temp. briefly for a firm that had these chairs (or a very good knockoff of the original, perhaps?) in their I.T. department. I found them to be seemingly extremely comfortable at first, but after sitting in one for an hour or two working on a PC, it felt "limiting". I guess it could be adjusted better - but in the typical office environment, nobody wants to spend 10 minutes playing with chair adjustments. (Heck, as a temp. - all the effort would only go towards that one afternoon's worth of use anyway. By the next day, I'd be sitting at a different cubicle.)
I guess I don't quite follow.... As someone else already asked, what exactly are you trying to accomplish with your machine(s)?
I've been using strictly PCs for 5 years or so now, after a brief stint with a "Performa" Mac mini-tower that didn't turn out too well.
My "high end" PC system is a Pentium 4, 1.8Ghz tower with Promise EIDE RAID and a GeForce 4 video board.
I'm pretty happy with it, but I really wanted a good system to run OS X and some of Apple's incredibly well-done video editing packages (Final Cut, iDVD, etc.). I just broke down and bought a dual-processor G4 1.42Ghz tower. I certainly don't feel it's "slow" at all! I'd say it performs at least on par with my P4 system, if not a little faster at certain tasks. It boots into OS X a lot more quickly than the P4 boots into Windows XP, for one thing.
Sure, the 970 processor will be great -- but the people complaining that the current PowerMacs are "horribly underpowered" must be "benchmark junkies", worried about having the best stats for the sake of stats (bragging rights?).
Like I say, I consider myself very much a "power user", and for a long time, I didn't think Apple really had the "price vs. performance" in the right place on the curve. But with their recent price drops, plus "speed bumps" to their G4 offerings - I think they still have a very competitive setup to tide them over until the 970 is done.
At the end of the day, you don't plunk down $2000-3400 for a "pro" Mac G4 or PowerBook because you're worried about having the "most Ghz". You do so because it offers an OS and specialized applications you can't get in the PC world. (These days, you might also do so to avoid the Microsoft licensing nightmares. A "family pack" of OS X lets you load it on any 5 systems of your choice for a price not much more than 1 single copy of Windows XP Pro, for example.)
I completely agree about saving the taxpayer's money, and re-using these older systems in schools when possible.
/. before, I work for a company that refurbishes old Apple Macs, primarily for use in daycares and schools (but lately, we've sold more to individuals as first computers for their own kids).
//c system, but we don't really specialize in going back any further than the original Macs.
//c or //e is the general lack of a hard drive. Floppy disks can and do wear out, and I think it's more practical for schools to have a system that can power up and run all of its intended software without the user intervention of inserting/removing specific disks.
//e as a dedicated system is a great idea. The dairy example you gave is one such perfectly good use. I've also seen model railroad enthusiasts do similar things with old IBM XT's and Tandy computers. They rig them up so their printer/serial ports send control messages to switch the trains onto different sections of track, control lighting of the model homes and businesses on the layout, etc.
//e, and nearly as cheap to get ahold of nowdays.
As I've noted on
We get the occasional donated Apple
The only problem I've seen with the pre-Mac Apples like a
I think using a
For all around school use, though, I think systems like the Mac LC3 or LC575 are a better option than a
I see your logic, but I still feel it's flawed.
Your risk vs. reward seems pretty skewed in this case, for one thing. Peng never so much as made a single public statement (much less a promise) that he'll use excess funds to fight the RIAA in the future.
I'd say the "smart money" is on him being scared (plus pressured by his family, etc.) to avoid any possibility of future confrontations with the recording industry.
Any excess funds he gets will probably just go into his pocketbook - never to give you any direct benefit.
I'd prefer to use this as another prime example of a reason to donate to organizations such as the EFF, that already earmark your money to fight worthy causes.
$17K might be a year's tuition to a college kid, but I really don't think this kid's going to end up having to drop out of school over this RIAA mess, nor do I forsee him really paying off the RIAA the full $17,000 any time in the near future.
I, for one, am going to pass on donating to this cause.
The last thing the RIAA wants is for this media show to backfire on them, with a bunch of "investigative reports" on TV of how Peng's life is completely ruined because the RIAA thinks collecting $17,000 from him for aiding in sharing music is more important than the rest of his education.
As the saying goes, you can't "squeeze blood from a turnip" -- but by proving he can actually raise the money via PayPal donations and such, maybe they won't leave him alone after all.
Honestly though, as a homeowner myself, I don't really recommend any of these solutions right now!
When I first bought my house, I had grand plans of automating everything. I was going to install X10 appliance and light controllers everywhere, computerize it all with web access, put speakers everywhere, etc. etc.
Well, it's been almost 5 years now, and the farthest I've gotten is getting a Dolby 5.1 surround sound setup in the living room.
I think once the initial excitement of having a new home wore off, I got much more practical - and realized all that stuff just meant more unnecessary expense, and more things to break down the road. I have enough home-related issues as it is. (A couple years ago, I decided to finish our basement, for example. Even that still isn't done, because as soon as we started on it, I discovered a leak was soaking the wood subfloor in the bathroom. Turns out, we had to rip out the bathroom floor and replace everything, due to a leaky pipe that went unnoticed for too long. The basement remodeling fund turned into a bathroom remodeling fund.)
I haven't felt any urgent need to hear Internet radio in all rooms of the house, anyway. Generally, if I want to hear it in another room, I just turn up my stereo so I can do so. (It's not an apartment complex, where turning up your stereo instantly means complaints from the old folks living just beneath you.....)
At first, I wrote off the idea of archiving video straight to IDE hard drives as "not viable" - simply because I thought of the fact that drives don't typically last more than 3 to 10 years.
On second thought though, that assumes a drive that sees regular use.
If you really used inexpensive IDE drives as though they were pieces of backup media - writing to them once and storing them away someplace safe (and at least somewhat climate controlled, like a bank safe deposit box), I'd bet they'd fire back up ok even after 15+ years of sitting in storage.
The question always becomes, will you still have computers using that standard by the time you need to review them? Nothing's certain, but I don't see why not. There are plenty of old 8088 systems (IBM XT and compatibles) that still boot up and function today, for example. You could even build a cheap PC just for this purpose and store it away someplace safe, along with the drives.
The *cheapest* fix, it seems to me, is just to xfer from your old VHS tape to fresh VHS tape (using the best quality tape possible), and get yourself another 20 some-odd years of storage of your movies.
Not that I really disagree with you, but just for the sake of fairness and reporting all the facts, a new purchase of Windows does give you a little more than just "IE and Wordpad".
They've always included at least a command line ftp command that runs from a DOS command prompt. They include a GUI telnet client as well. They've always included the "Paint" program to edit bitmapped graphics and do simple drawing/doodling.
If you purchase Windows XP, you also get a movie-maker application, as well as the ability to burn files and directories to CD, integrated into the OS. I believe both 2000 and XP include a moderately decent image viewer/editor application as well.
Of course, there are also a number of less important "applets" like the calculator, Windows notepad, the sound recorder utility, and "Character Map" (to make it easy to copy/past a non-standard ASCII character into a file/document).
Any decent Linux distro includes *far* more software than a Windows installation CD does. There's no contest there.... I'm just not sure how important that really is to most buyers?
Don't forget, most of the chain-store bought PCs not only come preloaded with Windows, but also come bundled with loads of commercial packages (things like Quicken, or MS Works, 3D Home Designer, etc.). I've actually had more than one person pay me for my time to come over to their house and *remove* a lot of these packages - because they didn't use the stuff and didn't want it cluttering up their computer anymore.
Right you are, about the blue-collar work not being "all that".
I'll tell you, most blue-collar workers I know make more cash than I.T. people I know (even I.T. managers in some cases, though they're probaby close to equal).
Nonetheless, I've stubbornly stuck with I.T. jobs only, despite the lure of much better pay. Mostly, it's for the reasons you cite. I'm not really fond of working out in the heat and cold, and/or tearing up my body. (Just one hospital stay not covered by insurance could set a person back much further than they got ahead with years of "better pay" in a construction job, for example!)
I've gone back and forth on that whole "tech worker's union" idea though. Right now, I tend to be against it. Unions aren't much loved or respected by most consumers. Heck, I see the unions putting up billboards all the time begging people not to shop at store X or Y because "non-union labor" was used there. Think anyone cares? No way! Those businesses tend to have the best prices/value for the dollar - and that's all the customer ultimately cares about when shopping.
I think you'd see plenty of "non-union techs" competing with the "union techs" for work, and winning the contract every time. What is the union supposed to really offer the customer when it comes to PC repair/upgrades? Certifications? Plenty of people have those already (or can go get them easily enough!). Nah, seems to me they'd just offer people an empty promise of "better quality work" - which they wouldn't really deliver on.
Oh, absolutely. I've been saying this for a while. Here in St. Louis, Missouri - you can find a pretty good-sized list of "I.T. job openings" in the Post Dispatch (or on their stltoday.com web site, if you prefer).
Many of these are from the same company (which I'll refrain from naming) that apparently has a policy of collecting up resumes into an H.R. database well in advance of actually having the advertised openings available. The listings aren't exactly "fake". They're simply for positions they could theoretically have open, if existing employees left.
It probably makes good business sense from their point of view. Why risk missing a superb candidate just because he/she didn't notice the want-ad when they ran it for a few weeks? Instead, get all those people into the database! Then, just search on what you've got when you need somebody, and give them a ring. In today's crappy economy, there's a pretty decent chance they'll still come in for an interview, even if you're calling them 8 or 9 months later than when they first responsed to your listing.