Let me guess, format issues, right? MS Office can't open a.odt file. You do know that all you have to do for that issue is save it as a.doc, right? And she knows this, too, right?
I'm currently a college student. As such, I've made use of all the major facets of the Office suites and found no issue between MSO and OO.o. The only MS Office/office-type programs that I have are Project and Visual Studio because I simply haven't found an open-source alternative for them (and in the case of Project, I only needed it for one class and I had the program at my disposal).
Actually, the experimentation I was referring to was Little Albert (see Classical Conditioning). My implication was also that human testing is severely limited and generally isn't supposed to be done without explicit permission (ie - the reciever/legal guardian of reciever is told that a drug/method is experimental and the reciever/guardian has to approve of using said drug/method). There comes a point where a given drug/method has to be used on people, otherwise we wouldn't have meds at all.
As for my interpretation of the analogy, it's exactly that: an interpretation. It's not meant to be cold, hard facts. And as for the stuff about the carpenter and the office worker. Take a look for yourself. It's as simple as finding a person who's rarely/never worked in a blue-collar, hard labor job and a person who's worked in a blue-collar, hard labor job his/her whole life. No, it's not cold, hard facts that have had years of studying and are now in black and white papers, encyclopedias and the like, but then again, neither is the simple fact that kids will get bumped and bruised from time to time. I'd like to think things like that shouldn't have to be studied and researched and experimented ad nauseum for people to realize that it's been there all along.
Now, in regards to the last paragraph in my last response, note the part of "and others," implying that "you" is no longer the personal, singular you, but the collective you, as in people in general. If you truly think that I attacked you personally, then you've already proven my point that this society has come to the point where nothing can be said or done without the fear of offending someone, somewhere, in some remote way. And come on, do you really think you're going to remember this very thread even this time next year? Unless you get some profound epiphany from it that you'll remember for the rest of your life, I highly doubt you, or anyone else involved in this entire thread, will remember much, if anything of this. The point is, even ten years from now, chances are, your ideas, values, and outlooks will be different from what they are now, partly because of the society we live in. Granted, what I said before may have been an exaggeration, but at the rate we're going, it may not be much of one. Political correctness and senseless paranoia have been taken to an extreme, and it doesn't take ten years of laboratory experimentation to figure that out.
Personally, as far as "wild" meats go, I don't think there's more to it than just what it is. The way wild game is butchered has a lot to do with the quality and taste of the meat (this includes the prescence and lack of skin, hair, and fat).
A well-butchered deer or bear with little to no fat is better than one with even a little fat on it.
I don't think wild game is an "aquired taste" any more than farm animals are. If a person's prime staple meat is one, then it may take a while to aquire a taste for the other, no matter which way they go. This at least holds true for the more, shall we say, common game (venison, rabbit, perhaps even aligator, but not so much things like squid, octopus, or others that are generally considered delicacies/exotic foods that aren't usually common in most human-inhabited areas).
And it seems I need to raise my glass to the brave buffalo and bison farmers out there.
There's a problem with your argument... they've all but banned human testing/experimentation in general, let alone long-term testing on children (anyone who's ever had a Phychology class knows where that stemmed from, too).
And honestly, there should be no need for a study. Simple common sense and actually seeing what's already in front of your eyes will go a long way. When a child first gets hurt, they cry like it's the end of the world, do they not? And they have good reason to, too. Their skin is soft and sensitive from lack of use and "weathering." As time goes by, their skin toughens, so that same little bump that made them bawl last year just dazes them for half a second before they're back up and running this year. And this year, it takes a fall off a bike into gravel that results in embedded rocks to get them to even stop, let alone cry.
What happens if they don't experience things like that as a child? Their skin remains soft and sensitive. As adults, they may not cry, but it'll probably still hurt more than someone who was "weathered" with the same injury. Evidence of this is seen now in various types of workers. The carpenter or other trademan that works all day in conditions that are far from ideal develops callouses to protect his hands and feet, his skin becomes darker if he works in the sun. On the other hand, you've got the office worker who rarely works with his hands in conditions to what the carpenter works in every single day. His hands and skin are soft and more fair-toned. The same knife will cut the office worker deeper than the carpenter.
The sheep/wolf/sheepdog analogy doesn't have to pertain to politics (even if that was the author's original intent). It can pertain to any part of life in which you have a protected/threat/protector environment. The protector does not want the protected to see that the methods used again the threat are equivalent to those used by the threat, but the protected sees both the threat and the protector as one and the same and therefore either fears the protector or trusts the threat. It is the protector's job to simultaneously teach the protected to fear the threat and trust the protector.
The situation here, however, is one where the protector teaches the protected of a false threat. The protected may associate other false threats as real threats, and when the protected becomes the protector, it will teach the protected of this new false threat. After a few cycles of this, you have the sue-happy, pillow-lining society that we are turning into.
Sadly, you, and others, will forget about this thread and the story from which it spawned, and years down the line, you will be teaching your kids that going outside is dangerous because they might get kidnapped, that running is dangerous because they might fall and get hurt and that they have to watch what they say because they might offend someone, somewhere, in some remote way, and you won't think there's anything wrong with that picture. You will accept it as a fact of life and go about your business without a second thought, even if it's completely opposite of everything you once knew.
It seems you are comparing Myspace to written communication.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't things like Myspace (and/. for that matter) very similar, if not equivalent to written communication? This is, of course, going by the definition of written communication being communication that involves symbols on a medium of some sort (ie - not voiced or gestured).
Personally, for the people I bother to keep in touch with I do so via other means of communication, often email, snail mail, or (gasp) the telephone. Then again my definition of a 'friend' is not somebody who will click an 'approve' button on a web page, rather it is somebody who I actually care about and make an effort to have interaction with.
Call me lazy, but it's oftentimes easier to communicate with several friends via a forum-type means, if you think about it. Plus, you have a separate archive that allows you to review what you once wrote. I, too, define my friends as someone more than a person that clicks "approve" on a web page, but most of my friends (that yes, I have met in real life and knew long before things like Myspace existed) live several hours away from me and none of us really have time to call one another and oftentimes the topics found on our journals fit better in a journal-esque rant for everyone to see at once than several phone calls repeating the same story.
Also, how are pen pals any different from the people one "meets" via a networking website/community? A pen pal is basically a person that you may or may not have met and may or may not ever meet, but you keep in touch with each other via written communication (traditionally snail mail letters). In that sense, the only difference between pen pals and Myspace friends is the medium of communication--digital versus paper.
This is totally off topic but I fear that myspace etc... has caused many people to forget how to make real world friends. I worry about this shit. As the father of a 4 year old I have made a point to teach him how to interact with people, not computers. I would much rather he grow up to be able to walk up to a stranger and have a good conversation then be able to program in assembly any day.
First, as long as interacting with a computer isn't to the exclusion of interacting with others in person, I don't think it has as negative of an effect as you portray. This, however, comes back to the whole "too much of a good thing..." idea.
There are a lot of people that I know through forums, message boards, and even MMOs that have jobs that involve talking to people all day (read - retail). Honestly, I spend all day talking to strangers and people in general, I'd rather come home and "interact with my computer" through message boards and MMOs than talk with more people.
At the same time, though, I'm not really interacting soley with the machine in front of me any more than if I was sitting in my living room, playing a Game Cube game with a friend or two. Okay, so the people I'm interacting with while on my computer don't happen to be in the same room (or even the same country) as me, but so what? Is it really detrimental to have friendships that exist soley in the digital world? I don't think so. You'd be surprised what interesting little tidbits of "useless information" you'd find out from the people you meet online that you'd probably never find out otherwise.
And kind of a tangent here -- who says that people that can program in assembly are socially inept? Actually, if you can program and have social skills, you'll go farther than people that only have one or the other.
As for the slashdot comment, I can't look at porn at work so.... I read slashdot, hey come to think of it this tookt me 10 minutes to type, I just made $8.50 responding to you.
I'm not going to comment on the first part of that, but in regards to the second half... I'd love to have your job. It'd be nice to get paid $51/hour to sit in front of a computer and post on Slashdot forums. =)
If you make the decision to have sex, then you make the decision to deal with the consequences, which includes children. If you don't like it, put them up for adoption, otherwise don't open your damn pants to begin with! It's that simple. Or, here's a thought...use birth control. You know, that pill, shot, or implant that the doctor can give you. Hell, if you never want kids, do what everyone wants people to do with pets and get fixed, then you never have to worry about those counter-productive things that pop out every year or so that are stopping you from becoming VP of the company.
You have to admit, though, it's amazing what Microsoft can do to the average consumer and get away with it. How many other companies can work so hard to push people away and yet still have damn near a monopoly on their sector of the software industry?
The stupidity of the general public never ceases to amaze me...
How has open source failed? Because it discourages monopolizing? Think about how much Microsoft has monopolized the software industry. Go to a consumer electronics store and every computer is equipped with some version of Windows and either MS Office or MS Works. Look for an office suite in that same store and you'll find three different variation of MS Office 2003, all of which run at least $150. Adobe does much the same in image editing. Look for an image editing program in the same store, and you'll find Photoshop Elements and/or Photoshop CS2.
If open source has failed, it has nothing to do with the software itself. Open source's biggest downfall is that there's very little to no profit involved. Because there's no profit, an open source team can't advertise like Microsoft does. You don't see commercials on TV or ads in PCWorld advertising the latest release of Open Office or Ubuntu Linux. Go into a customer service-based electronics store like Best Buy or Circuit City and everyone there will recommend the Microsoft/Adobe/Symantec/Webroot product, even though most of them use a not-so-legal copy of Windows and Photoshop, AVG or Avast!, and Spybot and/or Adaware, or some other similar title of each kind of product that they don't have to pay for. They recommend them because it makes their company money, which means they get to keep their job. Because it can't be adverstised on a large scale, not many people know about the free products that are out there (combine that with the overly-paranoid ideas about downloading things and you've pretty much got the general public).
Perhaps the "cries of the open source movement" are beating a dead horse, but when a decent-sized company takes interest in something that's not Microsoft, it makes the news. The news and word-of-mouth are pretty much the only way to do any major advertising. And if you think about it, isn't advertising in general nothing more than "beating a dead horse"? All they do is go on and on and on about something in hopes that a few people out of the millions that see it will go out and buy said product.
And because Apple was the only one that sold PPC chips to the public, unlike Intel chips which were cloned (hence the terms IBM-compatible and Clone PC) and are made and sold by several different companies, Apple could choose what price they sold their chips at because they had no one to compete with. With Apple moving to Intel chips, it may become easier to "clone" Apples, in a sense (though I will admit that I'm not sure offhand how the licensing works with that now that they've switched).
And if you're going to act all high-and-mighty, might you consider signing in instead of posting as an AC?
Standard 3rd party hardware, maybe, but it's standard 3rd party hardware that's made by different companies. Until Apple's switch to Intel, IBM and Motorola made most of the parts (don't know who they have making the new Intel hardware). Dell, on the other hand, uses other various manufacturers (the proof is on the mobo). The quality difference stems from the processes and resources that went into the making of each company's systems. Apple is also more than just a website and a warehouse, unlike Dell.
The PowerPC architecture was one of the main reasons Apples were more expensive, because it was proprietary (we'll probably see the prices drop as time goes on with the new Intel systems). And I beg to differ on your "better video cards..." statement. There's a reason why graphic design and animation studios and schools went for Apple computers, the PowerPC archetecture simply handled it better. Also, compairing x86 hardware to PPC hardware is like compairing an Athlon XP (~1.5-2.0GHz) to a Pentium 4 (~3.4GHz). The Pentium has a faster clock speed, but the architecture of the Athlon makes it more efficient (Wikipedia). The different architecture of PPC hardware offers different software results than comparable Intel systems.
Yes, there is probably a difference in the profit margins between Apple and other electronics companies, but unlike the other companies, Apple doesn't specialize as much as Microsoft, Dell, or AMD. AMD only makes processors, Dell only builds computers, Microsoft primarily produces software (they do have some keyboards, mice, and webcams with their name). Now, I know Apple doesn't do everything, parts of it is outsourced, but that goes with every company, but from the Apple company comes hardware and software, computers and electronics. It's like having all your funiture from a company that sells it all in what can become one, giant set, or having your dining set from one company, a couch from another company, and a chair from yet another company and getting a hodge-podge, though possibly matching set-that-isn't-really-a-set.
Personally, I wouldn't even recommend an XPS to anyone...They're just glorified Dimensions and Inpirons...
Gateway's nominally better in quality, but they get weird quirks when they go wrong. E-Machines is just a second-hand Gateway anymore. About the same quality as a Dell, perhaps a little more, so decent for someone who has a very limited budget and knows next to nothing about computers (the biggest advantage an E-Machines has over a Dell are the in-store warranties and services a consumer can get from buying an E-Machines at a physical store).
With as low of a profit margin that there is on computers, it's a wonder Dell is still in service...
I don't know about the school(s) you went to, but mine taught about "world religions" like Buddhism and Hinduism. Granted, there wasn't much detail in it, but it was there. So religions are already in at least some schools. I think, though, more different religions should be taught in school (and if more religions are taught, it could be its own class), assuming districts can find unbiased teachers...
First of all, just because you posted from a Mac, that doesn't mean you own a Mac. For all we know, you posted from a friend's computers because it was the only thing available.
I'm not saying every piece of software does this, but I own several that use the same disk to install on Windows AND Mac. So no, you don't ALWAYS have to rebuy your software. Some of it, I have no doubt, but possibly not all of it. Like I said, third party software (software that's not owned by Microsoft or Apple) sometimes has this capability. Also, OSS is a viable option, whether or not people like to admit it (and no, I'm not saying everyone should switch completely over to OSS, but unless you need capabilities found only in a certain proprietary title, OSS is a good alternative to things like Office). Not to mention that the biggest compatibility problem with Macs in the past was that they ran on the PowerPC architecture, so it wasn't merely a different OS, but different hardware as well. That point it moot now, and developers only need worry about a different OS in the future.
You're argument about the PS/2 mouse/keyboard has merit, but adapters are fairly cheap, and I know for a fact that Dynex adapters from Best Buy work on Macs (I bought one to use on an iMac that I had, and according to the website, they're even compatible on Sun platforms). Again, you're right in the fact that many monitors aren't DVI, but you can get a 19" DVI LCD for less than $200 (or pay $20 for an adapter that may work for their purposes). So, for the price of a new HP or Gateway with similar specs (and I can pretty much guarantee you, that if you go into an electronics store to buy a computer, you'll come out with more than just the machine, tack on a service plan for around $100, and possibly some sort of security setup for at least $80, that $800 computer has now become a grand), you can now have an Apple. Not to mention the money you'll save from not having to update subscriptions of NAV and Spysweeper (or having to buy them at all).
I don't have the proverbial rose-colored glasses on when it comes to Apple or OSS, I simply keep an open mind about viable alternatives, which both are, and try to correct the FUD and other crap that I see about them, while still acknowledging any downfalls I find (and you may want to check that MacBook and make sure it's battery hasn't been recalled, by the way). Your points work both ways, whether switching from Mac to Windows or vice versa, which is probably why more people don't switch either way (then you have geeks like those of us on/. with Macs, Linux boxes, and Windows machines galore).
And another thing, you might have more credibility to the Mac/OSS people if your name wasn't "MSFanBoi2", which implies bias in favor of Microsoft, and was more neutral, instead.
Ok then, what about the American Civil Rights Act? That and accompianing laws are a product of civil disobedience. Or how about strikes? The intent there is usually to get more money or benefits, but it's to change something that the people were dissatisfied with. It does work, and has worked, as long as sufficient amounts of people are willing to come together for the same cause, whether that amount be 20 people or 20 million depends entirely on the size of the business. In the case of Microsoft, it's not solely pirating (though that adds to their cost since that can involve the courts and audits and all sorts of fun stuff), it's also the large amount of people migrating to Linux/OSS (businesses especially), using third-party margin software like Firefox, Open Office, and Norton. Windows XP Pro cost in the vicinity of $200USD, Office costs over $325USD for standard and almost $400 for professional edition. Now, an OS costing a decent chunck of change is understandable, since it runs everything on the system and the developers need to eat, but the fact that Office costs almost twice as much as the OS is a little outrageous.
I find it interesting, too, that he seems to have little knowledge of what an Apple computer requires as far as hardware. Otherwise he'd know that a standard USB mouse and keyboard, and a standard monitor generally works with most Macs. He'd also know that most third-party software (ie - not MS brand, though even some of them are Mac supported) generally has Mac support from the beginning, AND that documents themselves are OS-independent and only require a program that can read said format (such as Open Office being able to open, edit, and create MS Office files such as Excel spreadsheets and Word documents). And if he paid ANY attention to the post he replied to, he'd know that the poster didn't suggest JUST Mac or Linux, but offered Windows options as well.
He'd also know that buying any decent, new computer usually entails paying at least $600 after everything is said and done...
The companies I've worked for tell the customer to either back their files up themselves, or let the company do it, otherwise the company is not responsible for lost files. The OS is then replaced, and if anything is FUBAR, the company has to fix the problem at no cost to the customer and the company eats what would have been the profits.
You were a jock in high school, weren't you? Or do you even remember high school? Let's see...you're 32, and aside from the fact that you don't have the guts to post with a username, that would put you in high school in what? Class of 1992? Hmm...so that means the geeks in your high school were probably tinkering with any A/V equipment your school had, probably working with the 5" floppies and the few computers your school probably had at that time, and don't forget the typewriters, they probably fixed those, too. And they did all this despite the fact that you and your buddies tried to shove them in a locker on a daily basis, belittle them, tell them they were worthless and noone cared about them (despite the fact that they practically ran the school, and pretty much run the country, but don't generally gloat about it because they're not that high-profile), and generally made their life a living hell. Treat people like professionals and they'll act like professionals (ask any Kindergarten teacher). And perhaps it's not them that need to grow up, but you're the one that needs to grow up (or perhaps you don't like teens because you're afraid of getting old?) and realize that they're the future and you'll be relying on them sooner than you think.
That aside, to the teen geeks who posted: The real geeks don't gloat about what they know or can do, aren't generally arrogant, and usually make their knowledge known through things like fixing the family computer and their parents tell friends and neighbors. I've had run-ins with people who bring their computers in after "the neighbor kid who knows a lot about computers" was done with it, and that's generally what happens. That's not to say, however, that all teens are like that. As one of them, I know what it's like to be told "you don't know anything, you're just a kid." Make your accomplishments based on what you know, learn everything you can, those certs and a college degree are a definite plus and can help fill in gaps that "real world experience" may not teach you. Also, work on people and communication skills, both written and verbal. A geek with good communication skills is virtually irreplacable. And also prove wrong people's ideas of "teenagers are obnoxious brats who think they know it all but lack any real world experience."
There's a WGA notification thing. I think that's what he's referring to. If the program detects the copy of Windows isn't legit (which it's been known to do on legit copies as well), then it does things like keeping you from logging in for a certain length of time and adds constant little popups saying "your copy of Windows may be pirated! Get legal now!" It's insanely annoying, but it's not required to get other updates.
Figure out what version of Windows that key's for (SP1, SP2, corporate, etc; one way to help narrow it down is to figure out what year that model came out) and get a CD of that version. It'll probably take a little work and digging, but it could work.
By the sound of your "situation," the laptop's running SP2, so your key is for SP1 (I've had that same problem before).
Other than that, it'd probably be easier/better to get a legit copy of an OS (if you don't want to shell out a bunch of money, give Linux a try) and stick it on there.
I'm guessing XP Home won't be supported shortly after Vista comes out, mainly because new systems will most likely have Vista on them. XP Pro will probably still be supported, and may get lucky and keep the support for as long as Win2k has, depending on how much it's used on servers (one of the main reasons, I think, why Win2k is still supported).
Because most users just want ease of use and familiarity. I love gentoo myself, but every Linux install that I've done so far has been tweaky, finicky, and just plain difficult at times. I like to play with it and learn, as it relates to my profession, but most users just don't want to put up with that. Windows, for the majority of users, just plain works.
Aside from Gentoo, what versions of Linux have you installed and what kinds of computers were they on? Although I think every expert has some sort of tweaks they do to a given OS to make it run better, my experience has taught me that Windows can be as finicky, if not more so, than any of them. It's amazing the number of changes, processes that are turned off, and crap that's uninstalled before a computer leaves the store when a customer gets a customization on their new computer.
Ok, so they may have to get used to a new way of installing programs (though, for a Mac, that's as easy as putting a file in a certain folder, which is nice), and may have to deal with a couple new names because of copyright restrictions, but it's not really anything that anyone can't handle if they take 10 minutes to learn their way around it. It's been proven that young children can learn their way around a totally new OS in about 5 minutes, even if their home computer is a different OS, but I guess that just goes to show you the deteriroration of a person's willingness to learn as they get older.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me guess, format issues, right? MS Office can't open a .odt file. You do know that all you have to do for that issue is save it as a .doc, right? And she knows this, too, right?
I'm currently a college student. As such, I've made use of all the major facets of the Office suites and found no issue between MSO and OO.o. The only MS Office/office-type programs that I have are Project and Visual Studio because I simply haven't found an open-source alternative for them (and in the case of Project, I only needed it for one class and I had the program at my disposal).
I've seen installs of Windows that lacked the Ethernet drivers for the onboard Ethernet...as well as half the other stuff on the mobo...
Actually, the experimentation I was referring to was Little Albert (see Classical Conditioning). My implication was also that human testing is severely limited and generally isn't supposed to be done without explicit permission (ie - the reciever/legal guardian of reciever is told that a drug/method is experimental and the reciever/guardian has to approve of using said drug/method). There comes a point where a given drug/method has to be used on people, otherwise we wouldn't have meds at all.
As for my interpretation of the analogy, it's exactly that: an interpretation. It's not meant to be cold, hard facts. And as for the stuff about the carpenter and the office worker. Take a look for yourself. It's as simple as finding a person who's rarely/never worked in a blue-collar, hard labor job and a person who's worked in a blue-collar, hard labor job his/her whole life. No, it's not cold, hard facts that have had years of studying and are now in black and white papers, encyclopedias and the like, but then again, neither is the simple fact that kids will get bumped and bruised from time to time. I'd like to think things like that shouldn't have to be studied and researched and experimented ad nauseum for people to realize that it's been there all along.
Now, in regards to the last paragraph in my last response, note the part of "and others," implying that "you" is no longer the personal, singular you, but the collective you, as in people in general. If you truly think that I attacked you personally, then you've already proven my point that this society has come to the point where nothing can be said or done without the fear of offending someone, somewhere, in some remote way. And come on, do you really think you're going to remember this very thread even this time next year? Unless you get some profound epiphany from it that you'll remember for the rest of your life, I highly doubt you, or anyone else involved in this entire thread, will remember much, if anything of this. The point is, even ten years from now, chances are, your ideas, values, and outlooks will be different from what they are now, partly because of the society we live in. Granted, what I said before may have been an exaggeration, but at the rate we're going, it may not be much of one. Political correctness and senseless paranoia have been taken to an extreme, and it doesn't take ten years of laboratory experimentation to figure that out.
Mmm...venison. :)
Personally, as far as "wild" meats go, I don't think there's more to it than just what it is. The way wild game is butchered has a lot to do with the quality and taste of the meat (this includes the prescence and lack of skin, hair, and fat).
A well-butchered deer or bear with little to no fat is better than one with even a little fat on it.
I don't think wild game is an "aquired taste" any more than farm animals are. If a person's prime staple meat is one, then it may take a while to aquire a taste for the other, no matter which way they go. This at least holds true for the more, shall we say, common game (venison, rabbit, perhaps even aligator, but not so much things like squid, octopus, or others that are generally considered delicacies/exotic foods that aren't usually common in most human-inhabited areas).
And it seems I need to raise my glass to the brave buffalo and bison farmers out there.
There's a problem with your argument... they've all but banned human testing/experimentation in general, let alone long-term testing on children (anyone who's ever had a Phychology class knows where that stemmed from, too).
And honestly, there should be no need for a study. Simple common sense and actually seeing what's already in front of your eyes will go a long way. When a child first gets hurt, they cry like it's the end of the world, do they not? And they have good reason to, too. Their skin is soft and sensitive from lack of use and "weathering." As time goes by, their skin toughens, so that same little bump that made them bawl last year just dazes them for half a second before they're back up and running this year. And this year, it takes a fall off a bike into gravel that results in embedded rocks to get them to even stop, let alone cry.
What happens if they don't experience things like that as a child? Their skin remains soft and sensitive. As adults, they may not cry, but it'll probably still hurt more than someone who was "weathered" with the same injury. Evidence of this is seen now in various types of workers. The carpenter or other trademan that works all day in conditions that are far from ideal develops callouses to protect his hands and feet, his skin becomes darker if he works in the sun. On the other hand, you've got the office worker who rarely works with his hands in conditions to what the carpenter works in every single day. His hands and skin are soft and more fair-toned. The same knife will cut the office worker deeper than the carpenter.
The sheep/wolf/sheepdog analogy doesn't have to pertain to politics (even if that was the author's original intent). It can pertain to any part of life in which you have a protected/threat/protector environment. The protector does not want the protected to see that the methods used again the threat are equivalent to those used by the threat, but the protected sees both the threat and the protector as one and the same and therefore either fears the protector or trusts the threat. It is the protector's job to simultaneously teach the protected to fear the threat and trust the protector.
The situation here, however, is one where the protector teaches the protected of a false threat. The protected may associate other false threats as real threats, and when the protected becomes the protector, it will teach the protected of this new false threat. After a few cycles of this, you have the sue-happy, pillow-lining society that we are turning into.
Sadly, you, and others, will forget about this thread and the story from which it spawned, and years down the line, you will be teaching your kids that going outside is dangerous because they might get kidnapped, that running is dangerous because they might fall and get hurt and that they have to watch what they say because they might offend someone, somewhere, in some remote way, and you won't think there's anything wrong with that picture. You will accept it as a fact of life and go about your business without a second thought, even if it's completely opposite of everything you once knew.
Fear the paddle!!
It seems you are comparing Myspace to written communication.
/. for that matter) very similar, if not equivalent to written communication? This is, of course, going by the definition of written communication being communication that involves symbols on a medium of some sort (ie - not voiced or gestured).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't things like Myspace (and
Personally, for the people I bother to keep in touch with I do so via other means of communication, often email, snail mail, or (gasp) the telephone. Then again my definition of a 'friend' is not somebody who will click an 'approve' button on a web page, rather it is somebody who I actually care about and make an effort to have interaction with.
Call me lazy, but it's oftentimes easier to communicate with several friends via a forum-type means, if you think about it. Plus, you have a separate archive that allows you to review what you once wrote. I, too, define my friends as someone more than a person that clicks "approve" on a web page, but most of my friends (that yes, I have met in real life and knew long before things like Myspace existed) live several hours away from me and none of us really have time to call one another and oftentimes the topics found on our journals fit better in a journal-esque rant for everyone to see at once than several phone calls repeating the same story.
Also, how are pen pals any different from the people one "meets" via a networking website/community? A pen pal is basically a person that you may or may not have met and may or may not ever meet, but you keep in touch with each other via written communication (traditionally snail mail letters). In that sense, the only difference between pen pals and Myspace friends is the medium of communication--digital versus paper.
This is totally off topic but I fear that myspace etc... has caused many people to forget how to make real world friends. I worry about this shit. As the father of a 4 year old I have made a point to teach him how to interact with people, not computers. I would much rather he grow up to be able to walk up to a stranger and have a good conversation then be able to program in assembly any day.
First, as long as interacting with a computer isn't to the exclusion of interacting with others in person, I don't think it has as negative of an effect as you portray. This, however, comes back to the whole "too much of a good thing..." idea.
There are a lot of people that I know through forums, message boards, and even MMOs that have jobs that involve talking to people all day (read - retail). Honestly, I spend all day talking to strangers and people in general, I'd rather come home and "interact with my computer" through message boards and MMOs than talk with more people.
At the same time, though, I'm not really interacting soley with the machine in front of me any more than if I was sitting in my living room, playing a Game Cube game with a friend or two. Okay, so the people I'm interacting with while on my computer don't happen to be in the same room (or even the same country) as me, but so what? Is it really detrimental to have friendships that exist soley in the digital world? I don't think so. You'd be surprised what interesting little tidbits of "useless information" you'd find out from the people you meet online that you'd probably never find out otherwise.
And kind of a tangent here -- who says that people that can program in assembly are socially inept? Actually, if you can program and have social skills, you'll go farther than people that only have one or the other.
As for the slashdot comment, I can't look at porn at work so.... I read slashdot, hey come to think of it this tookt me 10 minutes to type, I just made $8.50 responding to you.
I'm not going to comment on the first part of that, but in regards to the second half... I'd love to have your job. It'd be nice to get paid $51/hour to sit in front of a computer and post on Slashdot forums. =)
If you make the decision to have sex, then you make the decision to deal with the consequences, which includes children. If you don't like it, put them up for adoption, otherwise don't open your damn pants to begin with! It's that simple. Or, here's a thought...use birth control. You know, that pill, shot, or implant that the doctor can give you. Hell, if you never want kids, do what everyone wants people to do with pets and get fixed, then you never have to worry about those counter-productive things that pop out every year or so that are stopping you from becoming VP of the company.
Or, if they somehow manage to develop a mind of their own, they'll go crazy before they get out because of the oppression.
They'll always find ways around parental controls... I know I did while growing up.
You have to admit, though, it's amazing what Microsoft can do to the average consumer and get away with it. How many other companies can work so hard to push people away and yet still have damn near a monopoly on their sector of the software industry?
The stupidity of the general public never ceases to amaze me...
How has open source failed? Because it discourages monopolizing? Think about how much Microsoft has monopolized the software industry. Go to a consumer electronics store and every computer is equipped with some version of Windows and either MS Office or MS Works. Look for an office suite in that same store and you'll find three different variation of MS Office 2003, all of which run at least $150. Adobe does much the same in image editing. Look for an image editing program in the same store, and you'll find Photoshop Elements and/or Photoshop CS2.
If open source has failed, it has nothing to do with the software itself. Open source's biggest downfall is that there's very little to no profit involved. Because there's no profit, an open source team can't advertise like Microsoft does. You don't see commercials on TV or ads in PCWorld advertising the latest release of Open Office or Ubuntu Linux. Go into a customer service-based electronics store like Best Buy or Circuit City and everyone there will recommend the Microsoft/Adobe/Symantec/Webroot product, even though most of them use a not-so-legal copy of Windows and Photoshop, AVG or Avast!, and Spybot and/or Adaware, or some other similar title of each kind of product that they don't have to pay for. They recommend them because it makes their company money, which means they get to keep their job. Because it can't be adverstised on a large scale, not many people know about the free products that are out there (combine that with the overly-paranoid ideas about downloading things and you've pretty much got the general public).
Perhaps the "cries of the open source movement" are beating a dead horse, but when a decent-sized company takes interest in something that's not Microsoft, it makes the news. The news and word-of-mouth are pretty much the only way to do any major advertising. And if you think about it, isn't advertising in general nothing more than "beating a dead horse"? All they do is go on and on and on about something in hopes that a few people out of the millions that see it will go out and buy said product.
And because Apple was the only one that sold PPC chips to the public, unlike Intel chips which were cloned (hence the terms IBM-compatible and Clone PC) and are made and sold by several different companies, Apple could choose what price they sold their chips at because they had no one to compete with. With Apple moving to Intel chips, it may become easier to "clone" Apples, in a sense (though I will admit that I'm not sure offhand how the licensing works with that now that they've switched).
And if you're going to act all high-and-mighty, might you consider signing in instead of posting as an AC?
Standard 3rd party hardware, maybe, but it's standard 3rd party hardware that's made by different companies. Until Apple's switch to Intel, IBM and Motorola made most of the parts (don't know who they have making the new Intel hardware). Dell, on the other hand, uses other various manufacturers (the proof is on the mobo). The quality difference stems from the processes and resources that went into the making of each company's systems. Apple is also more than just a website and a warehouse, unlike Dell.
The PowerPC architecture was one of the main reasons Apples were more expensive, because it was proprietary (we'll probably see the prices drop as time goes on with the new Intel systems). And I beg to differ on your "better video cards..." statement. There's a reason why graphic design and animation studios and schools went for Apple computers, the PowerPC archetecture simply handled it better. Also, compairing x86 hardware to PPC hardware is like compairing an Athlon XP (~1.5-2.0GHz) to a Pentium 4 (~3.4GHz). The Pentium has a faster clock speed, but the architecture of the Athlon makes it more efficient (Wikipedia). The different architecture of PPC hardware offers different software results than comparable Intel systems.
Yes, there is probably a difference in the profit margins between Apple and other electronics companies, but unlike the other companies, Apple doesn't specialize as much as Microsoft, Dell, or AMD. AMD only makes processors, Dell only builds computers, Microsoft primarily produces software (they do have some keyboards, mice, and webcams with their name). Now, I know Apple doesn't do everything, parts of it is outsourced, but that goes with every company, but from the Apple company comes hardware and software, computers and electronics. It's like having all your funiture from a company that sells it all in what can become one, giant set, or having your dining set from one company, a couch from another company, and a chair from yet another company and getting a hodge-podge, though possibly matching set-that-isn't-really-a-set.
Personally, I wouldn't even recommend an XPS to anyone...They're just glorified Dimensions and Inpirons...
Gateway's nominally better in quality, but they get weird quirks when they go wrong. E-Machines is just a second-hand Gateway anymore. About the same quality as a Dell, perhaps a little more, so decent for someone who has a very limited budget and knows next to nothing about computers (the biggest advantage an E-Machines has over a Dell are the in-store warranties and services a consumer can get from buying an E-Machines at a physical store).
With as low of a profit margin that there is on computers, it's a wonder Dell is still in service...
I don't know about the school(s) you went to, but mine taught about "world religions" like Buddhism and Hinduism. Granted, there wasn't much detail in it, but it was there. So religions are already in at least some schools. I think, though, more different religions should be taught in school (and if more religions are taught, it could be its own class), assuming districts can find unbiased teachers...
First of all, just because you posted from a Mac, that doesn't mean you own a Mac. For all we know, you posted from a friend's computers because it was the only thing available.
/. with Macs, Linux boxes, and Windows machines galore).
I'm not saying every piece of software does this, but I own several that use the same disk to install on Windows AND Mac. So no, you don't ALWAYS have to rebuy your software. Some of it, I have no doubt, but possibly not all of it. Like I said, third party software (software that's not owned by Microsoft or Apple) sometimes has this capability. Also, OSS is a viable option, whether or not people like to admit it (and no, I'm not saying everyone should switch completely over to OSS, but unless you need capabilities found only in a certain proprietary title, OSS is a good alternative to things like Office). Not to mention that the biggest compatibility problem with Macs in the past was that they ran on the PowerPC architecture, so it wasn't merely a different OS, but different hardware as well. That point it moot now, and developers only need worry about a different OS in the future.
You're argument about the PS/2 mouse/keyboard has merit, but adapters are fairly cheap, and I know for a fact that Dynex adapters from Best Buy work on Macs (I bought one to use on an iMac that I had, and according to the website, they're even compatible on Sun platforms). Again, you're right in the fact that many monitors aren't DVI, but you can get a 19" DVI LCD for less than $200 (or pay $20 for an adapter that may work for their purposes). So, for the price of a new HP or Gateway with similar specs (and I can pretty much guarantee you, that if you go into an electronics store to buy a computer, you'll come out with more than just the machine, tack on a service plan for around $100, and possibly some sort of security setup for at least $80, that $800 computer has now become a grand), you can now have an Apple. Not to mention the money you'll save from not having to update subscriptions of NAV and Spysweeper (or having to buy them at all).
I don't have the proverbial rose-colored glasses on when it comes to Apple or OSS, I simply keep an open mind about viable alternatives, which both are, and try to correct the FUD and other crap that I see about them, while still acknowledging any downfalls I find (and you may want to check that MacBook and make sure it's battery hasn't been recalled, by the way). Your points work both ways, whether switching from Mac to Windows or vice versa, which is probably why more people don't switch either way (then you have geeks like those of us on
And another thing, you might have more credibility to the Mac/OSS people if your name wasn't "MSFanBoi2", which implies bias in favor of Microsoft, and was more neutral, instead.
Ok then, what about the American Civil Rights Act? That and accompianing laws are a product of civil disobedience. Or how about strikes? The intent there is usually to get more money or benefits, but it's to change something that the people were dissatisfied with. It does work, and has worked, as long as sufficient amounts of people are willing to come together for the same cause, whether that amount be 20 people or 20 million depends entirely on the size of the business. In the case of Microsoft, it's not solely pirating (though that adds to their cost since that can involve the courts and audits and all sorts of fun stuff), it's also the large amount of people migrating to Linux/OSS (businesses especially), using third-party margin software like Firefox, Open Office, and Norton. Windows XP Pro cost in the vicinity of $200USD, Office costs over $325USD for standard and almost $400 for professional edition. Now, an OS costing a decent chunck of change is understandable, since it runs everything on the system and the developers need to eat, but the fact that Office costs almost twice as much as the OS is a little outrageous.
I find it interesting, too, that he seems to have little knowledge of what an Apple computer requires as far as hardware. Otherwise he'd know that a standard USB mouse and keyboard, and a standard monitor generally works with most Macs. He'd also know that most third-party software (ie - not MS brand, though even some of them are Mac supported) generally has Mac support from the beginning, AND that documents themselves are OS-independent and only require a program that can read said format (such as Open Office being able to open, edit, and create MS Office files such as Excel spreadsheets and Word documents). And if he paid ANY attention to the post he replied to, he'd know that the poster didn't suggest JUST Mac or Linux, but offered Windows options as well.
He'd also know that buying any decent, new computer usually entails paying at least $600 after everything is said and done...
The companies I've worked for tell the customer to either back their files up themselves, or let the company do it, otherwise the company is not responsible for lost files. The OS is then replaced, and if anything is FUBAR, the company has to fix the problem at no cost to the customer and the company eats what would have been the profits.
You were a jock in high school, weren't you? Or do you even remember high school? Let's see...you're 32, and aside from the fact that you don't have the guts to post with a username, that would put you in high school in what? Class of 1992? Hmm...so that means the geeks in your high school were probably tinkering with any A/V equipment your school had, probably working with the 5" floppies and the few computers your school probably had at that time, and don't forget the typewriters, they probably fixed those, too. And they did all this despite the fact that you and your buddies tried to shove them in a locker on a daily basis, belittle them, tell them they were worthless and noone cared about them (despite the fact that they practically ran the school, and pretty much run the country, but don't generally gloat about it because they're not that high-profile), and generally made their life a living hell. Treat people like professionals and they'll act like professionals (ask any Kindergarten teacher). And perhaps it's not them that need to grow up, but you're the one that needs to grow up (or perhaps you don't like teens because you're afraid of getting old?) and realize that they're the future and you'll be relying on them sooner than you think.
That aside, to the teen geeks who posted: The real geeks don't gloat about what they know or can do, aren't generally arrogant, and usually make their knowledge known through things like fixing the family computer and their parents tell friends and neighbors. I've had run-ins with people who bring their computers in after "the neighbor kid who knows a lot about computers" was done with it, and that's generally what happens. That's not to say, however, that all teens are like that. As one of them, I know what it's like to be told "you don't know anything, you're just a kid." Make your accomplishments based on what you know, learn everything you can, those certs and a college degree are a definite plus and can help fill in gaps that "real world experience" may not teach you. Also, work on people and communication skills, both written and verbal. A geek with good communication skills is virtually irreplacable. And also prove wrong people's ideas of "teenagers are obnoxious brats who think they know it all but lack any real world experience."
There's a WGA notification thing. I think that's what he's referring to. If the program detects the copy of Windows isn't legit (which it's been known to do on legit copies as well), then it does things like keeping you from logging in for a certain length of time and adds constant little popups saying "your copy of Windows may be pirated! Get legal now!" It's insanely annoying, but it's not required to get other updates.
Figure out what version of Windows that key's for (SP1, SP2, corporate, etc; one way to help narrow it down is to figure out what year that model came out) and get a CD of that version. It'll probably take a little work and digging, but it could work.
By the sound of your "situation," the laptop's running SP2, so your key is for SP1 (I've had that same problem before).
Other than that, it'd probably be easier/better to get a legit copy of an OS (if you don't want to shell out a bunch of money, give Linux a try) and stick it on there.
Wow...you missed the sarcasm in the post you're responding to (note the "uh huh")....
Actually, Microsoft ended support for Win98 and ME as of June 2006, and will be ending suport for XP SP1 in October. Win2k entered the extended support phase and will only receive security patches until 2010.
I'm guessing XP Home won't be supported shortly after Vista comes out, mainly because new systems will most likely have Vista on them. XP Pro will probably still be supported, and may get lucky and keep the support for as long as Win2k has, depending on how much it's used on servers (one of the main reasons, I think, why Win2k is still supported).
Because most users just want ease of use and familiarity. I love gentoo myself, but every Linux install that I've done so far has been tweaky, finicky, and just plain difficult at times. I like to play with it and learn, as it relates to my profession, but most users just don't want to put up with that. Windows, for the majority of users, just plain works.
Aside from Gentoo, what versions of Linux have you installed and what kinds of computers were they on? Although I think every expert has some sort of tweaks they do to a given OS to make it run better, my experience has taught me that Windows can be as finicky, if not more so, than any of them. It's amazing the number of changes, processes that are turned off, and crap that's uninstalled before a computer leaves the store when a customer gets a customization on their new computer.
Ok, so they may have to get used to a new way of installing programs (though, for a Mac, that's as easy as putting a file in a certain folder, which is nice), and may have to deal with a couple new names because of copyright restrictions, but it's not really anything that anyone can't handle if they take 10 minutes to learn their way around it. It's been proven that young children can learn their way around a totally new OS in about 5 minutes, even if their home computer is a different OS, but I guess that just goes to show you the deteriroration of a person's willingness to learn as they get older.
....you do know that banks are government funded and regulated.....right?
As for the fraud, that's negligence on the part of the store that could have/should have had them shut down.