But don't think it's something special about Jobs. It's what any company founder should do, and what most would do, because they actually believe in what they're doing.
I think you've hit the nail on the head, though maybe even more literally than you realize. Jobs is a CEO who has a passion for what he does. He, unlike so many of todays CEO's, managers, and even business/corporation owners, truly thinks to himself, "we have the best thing since sliced bread"; the only difference between Jobs and all the other leaders in business today is that his belief is founded more in truth than not. I know that some may blast me by questioning why Apple only has 3-5% market share if the products are so great.
I realize that some see scale as proof of ultimate value. I prefer to look at things in context. Sure, generic PC's with Windows pre-installed is all the rage among computer buyers (in general). However, we are in a market that is dollar driven, where the emphasis of our buying decisions has been placed squarely on the price aspect. That doesn't mean that a Ford is better than a BMW. Of course, it also doesn't mean that a Jaguar is better than a Ford!
My point here is that Apple is so fascinating, and their products so exquisite, simply because the person who has power to make change, both within the company and outside in the world is taking full opportunity to do so. His motivation is not money first (though he seems comfortable being moderately loaded). I believe his greatest asset (and motivation) is that he can sleep at night knowing that whatever he is selling at the time, he truly feels that there's no better alternative. The guy may seem cocky, but I think he's set the bar so high mainly by his confidence to get the job done right the first time. (haha, that's a pun.)
is the same as the one on the first link you have posted. I agree with a previous post that though the information is suppressed, it isn't any secret what happened in history for those who really want to know. Even though the results are filtered, there will inevitably be those pieces that make it through, and in time, the results will prove to be exponential. Google (if they really want to "do good") may not be able to do a whole lot of good now in China. However, if they loose the market share battle to the likes of Microsoft, then they may never have the opportunity to do good ANYWHERE. Something at least to think about....
I think you are referring to a 'virtual' image. The difference is noteworthy, as you'll be lucky to have that much left after you're seen in public with one of these things strapped to your cranium.
Widows donating money they can't spare don't really have such a big impact.
Hmm... Actually, if we had more widows, (and people in general), who were just like this, then the world would be close to a perfect place. It is the good will, good nature, and good faith of a large portion of society which creates a good society, not the actions of a very rich and (very select) few. Be careful on the value that you assign to individuals and their actions, especially if the attention you have given them was initially endorsed by a major media outlet. Their major driving force in the market is shock value. That is why no widow was ever Time's person of the year.
I know this is gonna score me some serious flamebait, but...
Then why can't I play songs purchased from iTunes on my Creative player?
Because when Apple designed the iPod, they (and most of the paying world), have decided that your Creative player is basically sub-standard shit. I am not personally saying that it's no good, but that is the way it appears to the market, and more importantly to Apple. If I were Steve Jobs, I would want to have a product that I could say the same thing about my competition. Why can't he?
Apple's strategy is not, was never, and probably won't ever be to have a gui or a music format or an office app that they give away or sell to just any schmoe on the street. Their approach is wholly different, in that they have decided to take on the big bad corp's that worry only about the bottom line, and offer the end consumer something far better, a whole package. The reason Apple's work so well, and why it's unlikely for someone who has owned just one to ever look back is because they are built well. Apple's have among the best retention of value over time, the best customer support, the highest level of quality build, and the best functionality/user operability. Combine that with unparalled out of box ease with BOTH hardware and software for the average joe, mixed with the raw power suited to the top professional, and you have yourself a winning solution in computing.
Microsoft, on the other hand, only has a six sided piece of cardboard with a little plastic disk on the inside. Oh, yeah, and those really amazing ads with dinosaurs at work. Yeah, those are killer, uh, innovations.
Obviously the original parent to this thread has never used an Apple for longer than about 2 minutes, or else he would have realized that Apple's OS has been in many ways revolutionary from beginning to end. Is OS X better than anything we have yet seen in Apple's OS history? It better be. Why is that all of a sudden a point that MS fanboys use to knock the Mac? Maybe we should reflect back to the Windows 3.1 days. Or maybe windows 95. Oh, and there was windows 98. But, wait, don't forget windows ME. I guess XP can't be left out. 2000 Professional was pretty good. Hmmm, overall looks like a pretty poor track record to me. Unless you try an Apple, for yourself, for real, at least once, you'll never understand.
people who gave off destructive mental interference waves
Well, I am in college right now, and I am learning about precisely the same thing in science, only having to do with light waves and their destructive and constructive interference instead. (this because I am going to the best photography school in the nation).
What do you know but the instructor fits this profile right down to the pocket protector. Not only does he cause destructive interference in direct proportion to the level of comprehension necessary to grasp what he is teaching, but when you ask questions to gain some clarity on the matter, he then transmogrifies into a flat and transparent medium (similar to a piece of flat glass) and refracts the question to some unknown point in space.
So I really can leave his class knowing less. And I thought I was just being funny.
She represents the worst of the Democrats in that she doesn't have any positions that won't change based on tomorrow's opinion poll.
Yes, but unfortunately she's a better liar and actress than politician, making her the most disillusioning hot topic in politics. Just like her putrid husband, she is a liar and a crook, and so self focused it is scary.
I have to admit that it is difficult to understand why they are so popular among American democratic voters, but at the same time I realize that they are so effective in their lies because the just spread it on thick, one after another after another.
I know I am going to be modded troll for even thinking ill of such venerable saints here at/. The point remains, as was spoken by parent, that Hillary (as does Bill), takes not one stand on anything she doesn't feel will increase her popularity. That is truly frightening. I realize that nobody is perfect. I also admit that Bush is not perfect. But one thing I can assure you. When that man says he is going to do something, he does it. He may not be right all the time, but he is consistent. That is what a true leader is, and should be.
On a side note, it seems funny that nothing but kudos are given for H&B here on/., until they do something that is anti-gaming/slashdot. Suddenly they are abandoned as THE embarrassment to the left. Interesting.
The problem starts in elementary school. It has become as system of memorizing what someone has decided is most important for long term success. There is memorization of times tables, english words, spelling, geographical locations and names, historical dates, even the periodic table of elements!
While I am sure there are millions of well documented accounts of people safely exiting a crisis situation simply because they recalled that xenon is a noble gas that has an atomic number of 54, I can't see the real value in the memorization game which dominates the teaching patterns across the US.
We simply need a completely new system which teaches our children HOW TO LEARN, rather than WHAT TO REMEMBER.
As finiteSet said, "People who might benefit by going to a university: 1) Anyone who doesn't know what they want to do", this country is ripe with people who grow up and don't know or don't remember what they wanted to become when they got there.
We are living in a time when learning is really just memorizing terms for a test in order to receive an acceptable grade, which when done enough times will lead to the reception of a piece of paper, which in turn becomes evidence to the world that that person is "smart enough".
What happened to learning for learnings sake? I dropped out of high school, which I thought was a joke, and 5 years later, (without any study or extra work), walked into an ACT testing center and took the test cold turkey. I walked away with a 23, which is above the national average. When I left school at age 16 I had a gpa of.0626! (NOT EVEN A 1.***!) I wasn't stupid, I was just sick of being told that in order to be "educated", I had to spit back some canned answer without having time to consider the meaning.
While I did flounder on the streets, and then at various jobs for about 3 years, I finally found that I was interested in photography, and am now enrolled in the most rigorous photographic institution in the world, Brooks Institute of Photography. I am receiving A grades, and am at the top of my class. I have a different perspective from those around me, in that I am here to learn what I know I need to succeed in my goals, not what the school deems required. Most of all, I am enrolled in a program that is focused to teach me exactly what I need to succeed long term, rather than being focused on current and passing trends. This system is what will give me the ultimate potential in the marketplace.
What we need is for parents to be more involved from the get-go, as well as a system which allows more of a student -> mentor relationship, rather than a teacher -> classroom relationship. I guarantee that if you ask a student to take up studies of things that interest them, and then guide to know what is relevant, they will soon find a passion for learning which is unquenchable.
That aspect of the copyright issue I agree with. I would think the idea of "copyright=average lifespan of artist" should be a foundation on which to make a standard. I think it is amazing, however, that we live in a society where someone can create something spectacular out of their artistic ability, and people will continue to buy it long after it goes in and out of it's fad. (Look at the beatles)
I am not trying to bait anyone here, just stating that maybe some of us on the consumer end (me included) have a skewed perspective on the issue of IP entitlement.
I am speaking to all the comments that are made about taking artist's creations and forcing them into the public domain simply because they employ language, or color, or sound.
As a photographer who has decided to take up a profession doing something for people that they cannot do for themselves, I see the value in protecting the creator of such content as art and certain kinds of information.
Knowledge is power, and if you want to use the work that I create carte blanche, then maybe you should spend as much time and money as I have developing the talent and do it yourself. Don't try to tell me that you deserve what I have rightfully worked hard to be skilled at creating, because you don't think it was my personal creation. It is my creation. It is my creation simply because I got off my duff and did something to make that creation, unlike the guy who feels entitled to it only because it was made with a camera that can be bought by anybody, or 'because light is all of ours to share, not sell'.
Now, do I think that things have gotten out of hand in regards to how some things are priced? Music, movies, photography, software? You bet! But what about medicine, insurance, lawyers, automobiles, cell phones, cellular service... The list goes on and on.
Interestingly enough, it is the tours and the public appearances that apparently get the musicians the bulk of their money, not the cd's. That would imply that it is not the price gouging on the media that is getting them rich, it is our shelling out 5-10 times that amount to see them once, live, in a sweaty, hot, stuffy, dark, crouded place. Kind of ironic.
I know that people can get pretty worked up about this issue. I agree that if we buy the music/movie/game/software, we should be able to use it in any way we desire. (web/computer/players/car) That is a completely rational expectation. This aspet of the "media conglomerate vs. consumer" battle, this I feel we should be protecting.
But as one slashdot reader tried to compare fair use rights to that of owning something that was bought over time and now owns, the argument just doesn't hold up, at least not to the majority of those that are trying to argue for the complete abolition of IP laws altogether. Let me explain.
Are you arguing that we should have the "right" to copy any work we desire for "personal" use? We should. But are we also fighting for the right to give and receive these works without any compensation to the companies/individuals who make these works? Where did personal go? Be rational.
Does it cost money under the current system to *legally* listen to music/read books/watch movies/ etc...? Of course. That's the whole point. If we want our entertainment just how it is now, but don't want to pay those who make it, who the hell is gonna make it? Can you sing? Then record an album, put it up as an open download, and feel warm and fuzzy. In the meantime, you are going to go to work and CREATE something that is going to be sold to somebody else and that is how you get paid. What is so unfair about that system? Try to make a living at something that nobody pays you for. Good luck.
We shouldn't need the law to protect the artists. Just because what they create doesn't shine, or create heat, or transport us from point A to B doesn't mean that it doesn't have $$$ value. We should be responsible enough to realize that if we like and use their product, we owe them a portion of what they need in support. If we think what they ask is too great, well, they aren't overpricing our water supply. Boycott them. We don't have to buy it. But stealing from them is only going to give them a better reason to gouge us.
It is irrational for one to think that because volkswagon beetles are overpriced, it's ok to steal one from the manufacturer just because they want it.
Have you actually used a GOOD LCD? I had an Apple studio display, (17") that is now almost 5 years old. I found that the colors were fantastic, and that the viewing angle was tremendous compared to other LCD's on the market. (I am a professional photographer, and thus need accurate *and consistent* color and tonality). The newest screens are only better.
These specs seem pretty accurate compared to my experience as I NEVER had any inconsistencies whether I was facing the monitor head on, or above/below/left/right of it.
I paid quite a bit more for this screen than others the same size. I'd say it was worth every penny when I take into account the savings on the chiropractor after the first month. Easier on the eyes, more accurate than CRT for digital to digital printing, sucks for gaming...what more could you ask for in a display?
But even though teachers may teach, I found they hate to be taught.
This is exactly why the current public educational system is terminally ill, and is only a matter of time before it falls. Hard. Microsoft is being read the same bed-time story about it's own fate as well.
Gasp. Ugh. Heretic. He spoke ill of Microsoft AND education IN ONE BREATH! Burn him! Burn him at the stake!
That's right. The moment teachers stopped wanting to learn (generally speaking) in this country, they stopped wanting to teach. Now is the time for the "Memorization System", which incidentally has replaced the "Education System".
Test me out on this. See if you can locate a student who exhibits a strong curiousity, and seeks a deep understanding in one, (or many) topics, which understanding is not fully expanded on in any particular class. Unfortunately, nine out of ten times, the student is suppressed, and informed that the purpose is to learn this, not that. Now, I admit that this is not SOLELY a problem of teachers not wanting to learn or teach what is not planned, but also a problem with the system in general, which, among other problems, sees a high student to teacher ratio as a good thing. Overall, however, I blame teachers.
After all, as they say, where there is a will, there is a way. I have seen those few exceptional teachers, who, when approached by students with a deep desire and propensity for true learning, have given them the mentorship and direction which the students curiousity hungered for. All this with exactly the same access to the resources of each and every other teacher at the given school.
The current educational system is riddled with the problem of big government spending. The more you spend in your department, the more praise you get, and the more money you get. The less you spend...well, you all know how it goes. What business, self standing and dependent, would ever make one year's anniversary mark with this mentality.
This attitude of waste has filtered throughout the whole educational system, and created a greedy sense of "it's good for the student if it is convenient for me" mentality. That is why the fellow who started this whole "no linux in school" discussion will never be swayed. It is not really a matter of what is best for the students. It is a matter of what is best for him.
Can I just say, 20 or more apps running at once. No problems. What does the color blue look like again? It's been so long.... Whether you have stability issues/security problems with your particular box or not is not the issue. The fact is that most Mac users are so well converted and at times over eager because they love their computers, and can't believe they are actually using a computer that just does what it is supposed to do.
Oh, and it is not just a simpleton that is saying this, as I run my own websites on a Linux box, and go to the far reaches of my OS's and harness the real power of *NIX in even my everyday activities. All this from a guy who started out knowing nothing of web programming or command line. Even my wife is now "computer literate", and can do some pretty amazing things with a computer that impresses even me.
It's ironic that windows users say that Macs are made for idiots that need a fool-proof child-safe computer, because it seems that it takes an idiot savant NOT to blow it with a windows box.
Windows users all talk like windows availability on a gazillion different pieces of hardware is a good thing, and that Apples stability because of it's OS's singularity is only worth the curse of the damned. In reality, Mac OS X's stability is not from the fact that nobody cares about it. It is from the careful, uncompromised, and consistent planning of a rock solid core foundation, and full control of everything built above it.
Alternatively, you can choose windows, an OS that is well compared to the whore of the computer industry. Sure, she gets around. But is that a good thing? There is really no such thing as "safe sex", nor is there "safe windows use". I mean, spyware, viruses, security holes so big that the if compared to polka-dotted drapes, the "security" would be represented by the "dots"?
I am the first to admit that no OS is perfect. Do I pray to OS X? Certainly not. But does it satisfy my needs as a tech savvy computer user, who is making a living doing what I need completely without the crutch of microsoft? In more ways than I can count.
Listen, to each their own. I simply find it funny that so many people can defend something, even to the extent of deriding the alternative, when they know NOTHING about it for themselves. Windows, for the average user, is NOT better than OS X. Mac's, for the average user, are NOT more expensive than the standard windows box. Mac's hold their value much better, and run generally longer. And on the professional level, don't even get me started. Windows is more popular because it is more widely invested in. That, unfortunately, is the only requisite some individuals have when determining value.
So, I repeat. 20 or more apps running at once.
Final Cut Pro HD Photoshop CS InDesign Safari Mail Preview Dreamweaver PhotoDesk iChat msn messenger Toast iTunes Quicktime Pro Terminal Sherlock Fontbook Calculator Wor d (program really sucks) Candy Crisis (Personal favorite) Deskshade windows media player (funny how much it sucks too) real player (not much better) FireFox internet explorer System Preferences
Slashdot Mirror
My point exactly! I'm glad you have discerned that.
I realize that some see scale as proof of ultimate value. I prefer to look at things in context. Sure, generic PC's with Windows pre-installed is all the rage among computer buyers (in general). However, we are in a market that is dollar driven, where the emphasis of our buying decisions has been placed squarely on the price aspect. That doesn't mean that a Ford is better than a BMW. Of course, it also doesn't mean that a Jaguar is better than a Ford!
My point here is that Apple is so fascinating, and their products so exquisite, simply because the person who has power to make change, both within the company and outside in the world is taking full opportunity to do so. His motivation is not money first (though he seems comfortable being moderately loaded). I believe his greatest asset (and motivation) is that he can sleep at night knowing that whatever he is selling at the time, he truly feels that there's no better alternative. The guy may seem cocky, but I think he's set the bar so high mainly by his confidence to get the job done right the first time. (haha, that's a pun.)
http://images.google.cn/images?q=tiananmen&svnum=
is the same as the one on the first link you have posted. I agree with a previous post that though the information is suppressed, it isn't any secret what happened in history for those who really want to know. Even though the results are filtered, there will inevitably be those pieces that make it through, and in time, the results will prove to be exponential. Google (if they really want to "do good") may not be able to do a whole lot of good now in China. However, if they loose the market share battle to the likes of Microsoft, then they may never have the opportunity to do good ANYWHERE. Something at least to think about....
Apple's strategy is not, was never, and probably won't ever be to have a gui or a music format or an office app that they give away or sell to just any schmoe on the street. Their approach is wholly different, in that they have decided to take on the big bad corp's that worry only about the bottom line, and offer the end consumer something far better, a whole package. The reason Apple's work so well, and why it's unlikely for someone who has owned just one to ever look back is because they are built well. Apple's have among the best retention of value over time, the best customer support, the highest level of quality build, and the best functionality/user operability. Combine that with unparalled out of box ease with BOTH hardware and software for the average joe, mixed with the raw power suited to the top professional, and you have yourself a winning solution in computing.
Microsoft, on the other hand, only has a six sided piece of cardboard with a little plastic disk on the inside. Oh, yeah, and those really amazing ads with dinosaurs at work. Yeah, those are killer, uh, innovations.
Obviously the original parent to this thread has never used an Apple for longer than about 2 minutes, or else he would have realized that Apple's OS has been in many ways revolutionary from beginning to end. Is OS X better than anything we have yet seen in Apple's OS history? It better be. Why is that all of a sudden a point that MS fanboys use to knock the Mac? Maybe we should reflect back to the Windows 3.1 days. Or maybe windows 95. Oh, and there was windows 98. But, wait, don't forget windows ME. I guess XP can't be left out. 2000 Professional was pretty good. Hmmm, overall looks like a pretty poor track record to me. Unless you try an Apple, for yourself, for real, at least once, you'll never understand.
What do you know but the instructor fits this profile right down to the pocket protector. Not only does he cause destructive interference in direct proportion to the level of comprehension necessary to grasp what he is teaching, but when you ask questions to gain some clarity on the matter, he then transmogrifies into a flat and transparent medium (similar to a piece of flat glass) and refracts the question to some unknown point in space.
So I really can leave his class knowing less. And I thought I was just being funny.
Give a man a fish, you feed him for a....proximately 3 1/2 weeks. Teach a man to genetically alter fish for increased yield...
I have to admit that it is difficult to understand why they are so popular among American democratic voters, but at the same time I realize that they are so effective in their lies because the just spread it on thick, one after another after another.
I know I am going to be modded troll for even thinking ill of such venerable saints here at
On a side note, it seems funny that nothing but kudos are given for H&B here on
The problem starts in elementary school. It has become as system of memorizing what someone has decided is most important for long term success. There is memorization of times tables, english words, spelling, geographical locations and names, historical dates, even the periodic table of elements!
.0626! (NOT EVEN A 1.***!) I wasn't stupid, I was just sick of being told that in order to be "educated", I had to spit back some canned answer without having time to consider the meaning.
While I am sure there are millions of well documented accounts of people safely exiting a crisis situation simply because they recalled that xenon is a noble gas that has an atomic number of 54, I can't see the real value in the memorization game which dominates the teaching patterns across the US.
We simply need a completely new system which teaches our children HOW TO LEARN, rather than WHAT TO REMEMBER.
As finiteSet said, "People who might benefit by going to a university: 1) Anyone who doesn't know what they want to do", this country is ripe with people who grow up and don't know or don't remember what they wanted to become when they got there.
We are living in a time when learning is really just memorizing terms for a test in order to receive an acceptable grade, which when done enough times will lead to the reception of a piece of paper, which in turn becomes evidence to the world that that person is "smart enough".
What happened to learning for learnings sake? I dropped out of high school, which I thought was a joke, and 5 years later, (without any study or extra work), walked into an ACT testing center and took the test cold turkey. I walked away with a 23, which is above the national average. When I left school at age 16 I had a gpa of
While I did flounder on the streets, and then at various jobs for about 3 years, I finally found that I was interested in photography, and am now enrolled in the most rigorous photographic institution in the world, Brooks Institute of Photography. I am receiving A grades, and am at the top of my class. I have a different perspective from those around me, in that I am here to learn what I know I need to succeed in my goals, not what the school deems required. Most of all, I am enrolled in a program that is focused to teach me exactly what I need to succeed long term, rather than being focused on current and passing trends. This system is what will give me the ultimate potential in the marketplace.
What we need is for parents to be more involved from the get-go, as well as a system which allows more of a student -> mentor relationship, rather than a teacher -> classroom relationship. I guarantee that if you ask a student to take up studies of things that interest them, and then guide to know what is relevant, they will soon find a passion for learning which is unquenchable.
What would happen if the CEO of Apple and the CEO of Intel decided to merge the two companies?
Just another classic case of too many chiefs and not enough endianness.
That aspect of the copyright issue I agree with. I would think the idea of "copyright=average lifespan of artist" should be a foundation on which to make a standard. I think it is amazing, however, that we live in a society where someone can create something spectacular out of their artistic ability, and people will continue to buy it long after it goes in and out of it's fad. (Look at the beatles)
I am not trying to bait anyone here, just stating that maybe some of us on the consumer end (me included) have a skewed perspective on the issue of IP entitlement.
I am speaking to all the comments that are made about taking artist's creations and forcing them into the public domain simply because they employ language, or color, or sound.
As a photographer who has decided to take up a profession doing something for people that they cannot do for themselves, I see the value in protecting the creator of such content as art and certain kinds of information.
Knowledge is power, and if you want to use the work that I create carte blanche, then maybe you should spend as much time and money as I have developing the talent and do it yourself. Don't try to tell me that you deserve what I have rightfully worked hard to be skilled at creating, because you don't think it was my personal creation. It is my creation. It is my creation simply because I got off my duff and did something to make that creation, unlike the guy who feels entitled to it only because it was made with a camera that can be bought by anybody, or 'because light is all of ours to share, not sell'.
Now, do I think that things have gotten out of hand in regards to how some things are priced? Music, movies, photography, software? You bet! But what about medicine, insurance, lawyers, automobiles, cell phones, cellular service... The list goes on and on.
Interestingly enough, it is the tours and the public appearances that apparently get the musicians the bulk of their money, not the cd's. That would imply that it is not the price gouging on the media that is getting them rich, it is our shelling out 5-10 times that amount to see them once, live, in a sweaty, hot, stuffy, dark, crouded place. Kind of ironic.
I know that people can get pretty worked up about this issue. I agree that if we buy the music/movie/game/software, we should be able to use it in any way we desire. (web/computer/players/car) That is a completely rational expectation. This aspet of the "media conglomerate vs. consumer" battle, this I feel we should be protecting.
But as one slashdot reader tried to compare fair use rights to that of owning something that was bought over time and now owns, the argument just doesn't hold up, at least not to the majority of those that are trying to argue for the complete abolition of IP laws altogether. Let me explain.
Are you arguing that we should have the "right" to copy any work we desire for "personal" use? We should. But are we also fighting for the right to give and receive these works without any compensation to the companies/individuals who make these works? Where did personal go? Be rational.
Does it cost money under the current system to *legally* listen to music/read books/watch movies/ etc...? Of course. That's the whole point. If we want our entertainment just how it is now, but don't want to pay those who make it, who the hell is gonna make it? Can you sing? Then record an album, put it up as an open download, and feel warm and fuzzy. In the meantime, you are going to go to work and CREATE something that is going to be sold to somebody else and that is how you get paid. What is so unfair about that system? Try to make a living at something that nobody pays you for. Good luck.
We shouldn't need the law to protect the artists. Just because what they create doesn't shine, or create heat, or transport us from point A to B doesn't mean that it doesn't have $$$ value. We should be responsible enough to realize that if we like and use their product, we owe them a portion of what they need in support. If we think what they ask is too great, well, they aren't overpricing our water supply. Boycott them. We don't have to buy it. But stealing from them is only going to give them a better reason to gouge us.
It is irrational for one to think that because volkswagon beetles are overpriced, it's ok to steal one from the manufacturer just because they want it.
Have you actually used a GOOD LCD? I had an Apple studio display, (17") that is now almost 5 years old. I found that the colors were fantastic, and that the viewing angle was tremendous compared to other LCD's on the market. (I am a professional photographer, and thus need accurate *and consistent* color and tonality). The newest screens are only better.
Introduction Date: May 21, 2001
Brightness: 200 cd/m2
Viewing Angle: 170/170
Contrast Ratio: 350:1
170-degree horizontal, 170-degree vertical.
These specs seem pretty accurate compared to my experience as I NEVER had any inconsistencies whether I was facing the monitor head on, or above/below/left/right of it.
I paid quite a bit more for this screen than others the same size. I'd say it was worth every penny when I take into account the savings on the chiropractor after the first month. Easier on the eyes, more accurate than CRT for digital to digital printing, sucks for gaming...what more could you ask for in a display?
This is exactly why the current public educational system is terminally ill, and is only a matter of time before it falls. Hard. Microsoft is being read the same bed-time story about it's own fate as well.
Gasp. Ugh. Heretic. He spoke ill of Microsoft AND education IN ONE BREATH! Burn him! Burn him at the stake!
That's right. The moment teachers stopped wanting to learn (generally speaking) in this country, they stopped wanting to teach. Now is the time for the "Memorization System", which incidentally has replaced the "Education System".
Test me out on this. See if you can locate a student who exhibits a strong curiousity, and seeks a deep understanding in one, (or many) topics, which understanding is not fully expanded on in any particular class. Unfortunately, nine out of ten times, the student is suppressed, and informed that the purpose is to learn this, not that. Now, I admit that this is not SOLELY a problem of teachers not wanting to learn or teach what is not planned, but also a problem with the system in general, which, among other problems, sees a high student to teacher ratio as a good thing. Overall, however, I blame teachers.
After all, as they say, where there is a will, there is a way. I have seen those few exceptional teachers, who, when approached by students with a deep desire and propensity for true learning, have given them the mentorship and direction which the students curiousity hungered for. All this with exactly the same access to the resources of each and every other teacher at the given school.
The current educational system is riddled with the problem of big government spending. The more you spend in your department, the more praise you get, and the more money you get. The less you spend...well, you all know how it goes. What business, self standing and dependent, would ever make one year's anniversary mark with this mentality.
This attitude of waste has filtered throughout the whole educational system, and created a greedy sense of "it's good for the student if it is convenient for me" mentality. That is why the fellow who started this whole "no linux in school" discussion will never be swayed. It is not really a matter of what is best for the students. It is a matter of what is best for him.
Can I just say, 20 or more apps running at once. No problems. What does the color blue look like again? It's been so long.... Whether you have stability issues/security problems with your particular box or not is not the issue. The fact is that most Mac users are so well converted and at times over eager because they love their computers, and can't believe they are actually using a computer that just does what it is supposed to do.
Oh, and it is not just a simpleton that is saying this, as I run my own websites on a Linux box, and go to the far reaches of my OS's and harness the real power of *NIX in even my everyday activities. All this from a guy who started out knowing nothing of web programming or command line. Even my wife is now "computer literate", and can do some pretty amazing things with a computer that impresses even me.
It's ironic that windows users say that Macs are made for idiots that need a fool-proof child-safe computer, because it seems that it takes an idiot savant NOT to blow it with a windows box.
Windows users all talk like windows availability on a gazillion different pieces of hardware is a good thing, and that Apples stability because of it's OS's singularity is only worth the curse of the damned. In reality, Mac OS X's stability is not from the fact that nobody cares about it. It is from the careful, uncompromised, and consistent planning of a rock solid core foundation, and full control of everything built above it.
Alternatively, you can choose windows, an OS that is well compared to the whore of the computer industry. Sure, she gets around. But is that a good thing? There is really no such thing as "safe sex", nor is there "safe windows use". I mean, spyware, viruses, security holes so big that the if compared to polka-dotted drapes, the "security" would be represented by the "dots"?
I am the first to admit that no OS is perfect. Do I pray to OS X? Certainly not. But does it satisfy my needs as a tech savvy computer user, who is making a living doing what I need completely without the crutch of microsoft? In more ways than I can count.
Listen, to each their own. I simply find it funny that so many people can defend something, even to the extent of deriding the alternative, when they know NOTHING about it for themselves. Windows, for the average user, is NOT better than OS X. Mac's, for the average user, are NOT more expensive than the standard windows box. Mac's hold their value much better, and run generally longer. And on the professional level, don't even get me started. Windows is more popular because it is more widely invested in. That, unfortunately, is the only requisite some individuals have when determining value.
So, I repeat. 20 or more apps running at once.
Final Cut Pro HD
Photoshop CS
InDesign
Safari
Mail
Preview
Dreamweaver
iChat
msn messenger
Toast
iTunes
Quicktime Pro
Terminal
Sherlock
Fontbook
Calculator
Wo
Candy Crisis (Personal favorite)
Deskshade
windows media player (funny how much it sucks too)
real player (not much better)
FireFox
internet explorer
System PreferencesNo Crashie! : )