Wifi, larger screen, other assorted goodies... It sounds basically like a PDA geared for music play back.
I picked up a Dell Axim x3i off EBay about half a year ago for under $200. Snagged a 1GB SD card for it a month later. And have been enjoying my play lists ever since.
I'm kinda interested in Warhammer now the Mythic is on board. They have a tremendous staff with what has always seemed like a great sense of project management. If they can bring that to the table for WH, it is definitely a turn for the better.
Not to mention that most workstations and home PCs don't run RAID 5. If the Core/Core2 chip sets are targeted for machines that don't run RAID, it's not a big deal. If you are running RAID 5, it's likely in a server environment where you would probably have a RAID controller and a Opteron or Xeon based chip.
Assuming people are performing the same math as you IS an assumption. If your point is percentage based, then say so. Any time you get into statistics you can easily skew the results to show what ever you want so long as people just assume you are doing the math in any specific way.
"Lots of security people on the mac means a greater percentage on the mac, given the small market share."
That is a perfectly acceptable statement, if you had said that in your first post, there would have been no confusion as to how you where applying the numbers.
"There are pro-microsoft comments modded to +5 in this very thread. "
Again, you make another assumption. I have not said anywhere in this thread that a pro-Microsoft comment could not be modded to +5, just that pro-Microsoft alternatives are more likely to be rated to +5.
"Besides my comment was in no way anti-microsoft;"
And another assumption, I never said your post was anti-Microsoft, I said it was pro-Microsoft alternative. There is a huge distinction there. Pro-Microsoft alternative is fine, it's about using the best tool, if there is a non-MS alternative that works equally well as the MS option, then use it. Being anti-MS just gets into ridiculous zealotry where you wind up with people using the wrong tool for the job because they refuse to even consider a MS solution.
"Or maybe, MS actually tends to make crappy products and screw their customers over with certain business practices and as a result, most people in the computer business recognize that and comment on it when appropriate."
Not commenting on the accuracy of that statement, but I would agree that that roughly describes the standard skew applied to/.
"guess if you don't know that macs have a smaller market share than Windows machines, you could have missed that these two things are one and the same, however, at that point maybe you should find a different forum than Slashdot as you can't possibly be a computer nerd."
Actually, if you were a true "computer nerd" you would understand the F'ups that assumptions make. Like the old adage says, "A good computer programmer will look both ways before crossing a one way street." That is reason that I questioned your initial statement, you sounded smart enough to know what you were trying to say, but what you were saying was not what you likely meant. I assure you that my status as a "computer nerd" is not in question.
"Enough people understood the original statement that it was modded to +5."
I would actually attest that to your proper grammar and pro-Microsoft alternative stance. No offence meant to any specific moderating member, but if someone posts "Bill Gates blows goats, I have proof." in the top 10 posts, they will likely get rated +5 insightful./. has a heavily skewed bias that usually spurns anything MS based, and praises anything that is an alternative. I'm not saying that MS alternatives are bad, I'm just saying that preaching to the choir will likely net a lot of "ah-men!"s and karma.
Your initial statement was that a large number of security people use Macs, there for, Macs are more secure. But that is not a true statement, because as I have pointed out there are very likely MORE security people using PCs than Macs, and PCs present the user with less secured experiences. The NUMBER of security people obviously does not have a cause relationship with secured experiences.
Your third statement was that a larger percentage of Mac users are security people, there for, Macs are more secure. That is a may be a true statement, the PERCENTAGE of security people may have a cause relationship with secured experiences.
Your first statement was inaccurate, that is all. You clarified, and you now have a statement that can be honestly and fairly researched and debated. Instead of blaiming readers for the missunderstanding, maybe you should review how you present your theory.
I think your numbers were pulled directly from a dark orifice wrapped in cotton, but yes, I understand what you are saying. My problem is not with your claim, I agree that the average user will likely have a more secure experience on a Mac than a PC (note "more secure experience", not "more secure"), but with how you presented your point of view. You made an implication, you countered someone who called you on it, and now after a 2nd rebuttal you finally clarify your statement to the point where it is matching your logic.
"What we need is a realistic free market playing field of open competition for anyone who wants to jump into the business."
The problem is that the phone industry isinherantly a monopolistic market. It takes a huge capitol investment it get into the market, which pretty much shuts out any small company entries. One of the things that scares me the most about the industry is that since the MaBell break up (which introduced some competition and reduced prices) the companies have slowly been re-merging to the point now where there are what, 3 primary land line phone carriers?
Free market and little regulation works wonderfully in most markets. I've rallied to the call of the free market many a times. But in industries where monopolies rule and competition, innovation, and low consumer prices are driven out, regulation is needed. A free (as in unregulated) market in the phone/backbone industry would result in a non-free (as in choice) market for the consumer.
"Do you understand the concept of inclusive and exclusive? "You also, unfortunately, are targeting a lot of the security expert crowd..." does not in any way preclude most mac people being clueless. Because a lot of security people use macs does not mean that all mac users are security people. The former is obvious to anyone who attended a security conference in the last four years."
But that also means the inverse is true. If you say "a lot of security people use macs" and are not implying that Mac users are generally more secure because of it, then the statement might as well say "a lot of security people use Windows PCs." Because, a lot of "security people" use windows. I would wager a guess there are significantly MORE "security people" that use Windows than OSX.
Your statement was either meant to imply something, which can be questioned, Or it was with out merritt.
First off, my apologies for your modding, I think you have a valid point that is worth discussing even if I don't agree with it. I also do not assume that since we do not agree that you are for the erosion of our rights.
However: "The two "freedoms" are not the same thing." and "the freedom to not be Muslim, to live under something other than the Islamic Caliphate"
I'm sure you will find that many of the freedoms (civil liberties) we take for granted are pretty well opposed to under Islamic Caliphate. The difference between the administrations erosion of our civil liberties and Muslim extremists attacking Western societies is not the religion, the difference is who is in charge once those civil liberties are gone. Religion is just a mask and a tool, used to hide the ambitions and give a political movement a manifest destiny. I stand by my statement that the enabling goals of both groups are the same (reducing freedom) and the objective goals only differ in who stands on the podium once the smoke settles.
Exactly, anyone who tells you different is look at the past through rose colored history glasses. Which introduces the quandary, are there times that Terrorist acts are acceptable?
History is written by the winner. So in looking back, we see the fore fathers of the US as freedom fighters, but at the time the British saw them a Terrorists raising descent and destabilizing their territories.
Now Ben, tell me all the ways the masked gun man with an AK-47 pointed at your head has destroyed your way of life. I mean, you can still go to work, raise a family, etc, the guy with the AK-47 pointed at you head the whole time hasn't prevented you from doing anything.
You just never know if, or when he will shoot. Same with the government. They have the power to detain you at the drop of the hat. The question I have for you is, do you wait until the gun man starts shooting to take his gun away? Do you wait for the government to start abusing there power before you place limits on them?
While I agree that the most desired goal is religiously based, the administration (specificly Pres Bush) has stated that "Terrorists hate our freedom"
Here are a few other ways of looking at it:
Is the real freedom the administration of today want to take away is The Freedom To Not Have Conservative Christian Values?
Or is the administration themselves a terrorist threat as they use the threat of violence against individuals or property to intimidate society to achieve political objectives? True, they themselves are not perpetrating the violence, but they are saying things along the line of "vote for us, or there will be bloodshed." Sure, they wrap it up a little more pleasantly with things like, "Other political parties are pansies, only our political party care for your safety." But that sounds an awful lot like a protection racket coming from a neighborhood gang. "The police can't keep your store from burning down, only the Crazy 88s can protect you."
As per the DOD: Terrorism is "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."
If Terrorist hate freedom and the Western way of life, it would be their political goal to reduce or remove our freedoms.
And out wonderful government, while attempting to fight against the terrorist have been slowly erroding our rights and freedoms.
So the harder our government fights, the more the terrorist win. Our government has done more to destroy our way of life than any terrorist organization ever could.
"Not defending the charges in this case (which do seem 100% bogus)"
Problem is that by the law, they do not appear bogus. His best argument is probably going to be that the warning signs should have made the officer aware, and it would be up to the judge (and eventually jury) to determine if the cop should have taken notice of those signs. If the signs say nothing about the audio recording though, I don't think that would even fly.
The law is pretty straight forward, for the most part, unless you are an agent of the state, a communications worker, or other authorized party, it is a felony to record ("Intercept") an oral communication in the state of NH when any party being recorded is not aware of the recording. It is also a felony to attempt to use that record for pretty much any purpose.
The best turn out IMO would be that the guy gets convicted and sentenced to 1 hour community service. He then sues the police for harassment to pay for the legal fees. And the legislature takes up the cause of adjusting the law so that it is not illegal to record an agent of the state.
Think of it as a liability. What are the chances that you would be sued for showing the clip? What are the possible damages you would have to pay? If you show a clip of "Ground Hog Day" to a group of 20 attendees, will one of them rat you out to the copyright holder? Does the copyright holder have the means and desire to persue you? Do you have enough money to make it worth the copyright holder's time to sue you?
Did I miss this memo? What happened to the whole "No taxation with out representation" deal? Is my senetor or congressman (along with reps from all 50 states) on the FCC board?
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, my bust, I'm illiterate.
-Rick
Wifi, larger screen, other assorted goodies... It sounds basically like a PDA geared for music play back.
I picked up a Dell Axim x3i off EBay about half a year ago for under $200. Snagged a 1GB SD card for it a month later. And have been enjoying my play lists ever since.
-Rick
I'm kinda interested in Warhammer now the Mythic is on board. They have a tremendous staff with what has always seemed like a great sense of project management. If they can bring that to the table for WH, it is definitely a turn for the better.
-Rick
Not to mention that most workstations and home PCs don't run RAID 5. If the Core/Core2 chip sets are targeted for machines that don't run RAID, it's not a big deal. If you are running RAID 5, it's likely in a server environment where you would probably have a RAID controller and a Opteron or Xeon based chip.
-Rick
Unless you don't have a local mail client ;) I really wonder how many of these issues I avoid completely by relying on web mail...
-Rick
"Mathematics is not an assumption."
/.
Assuming people are performing the same math as you IS an assumption. If your point is percentage based, then say so. Any time you get into statistics you can easily skew the results to show what ever you want so long as people just assume you are doing the math in any specific way.
"Lots of security people on the mac means a greater percentage on the mac, given the small market share."
That is a perfectly acceptable statement, if you had said that in your first post, there would have been no confusion as to how you where applying the numbers.
"There are pro-microsoft comments modded to +5 in this very thread. "
Again, you make another assumption. I have not said anywhere in this thread that a pro-Microsoft comment could not be modded to +5, just that pro-Microsoft alternatives are more likely to be rated to +5.
"Besides my comment was in no way anti-microsoft;"
And another assumption, I never said your post was anti-Microsoft, I said it was pro-Microsoft alternative. There is a huge distinction there. Pro-Microsoft alternative is fine, it's about using the best tool, if there is a non-MS alternative that works equally well as the MS option, then use it. Being anti-MS just gets into ridiculous zealotry where you wind up with people using the wrong tool for the job because they refuse to even consider a MS solution.
"Or maybe, MS actually tends to make crappy products and screw their customers over with certain business practices and as a result, most people in the computer business recognize that and comment on it when appropriate."
Not commenting on the accuracy of that statement, but I would agree that that roughly describes the standard skew applied to
-Rick
"guess if you don't know that macs have a smaller market share than Windows machines, you could have missed that these two things are one and the same, however, at that point maybe you should find a different forum than Slashdot as you can't possibly be a computer nerd."
/. has a heavily skewed bias that usually spurns anything MS based, and praises anything that is an alternative. I'm not saying that MS alternatives are bad, I'm just saying that preaching to the choir will likely net a lot of "ah-men!"s and karma.
Actually, if you were a true "computer nerd" you would understand the F'ups that assumptions make. Like the old adage says, "A good computer programmer will look both ways before crossing a one way street." That is reason that I questioned your initial statement, you sounded smart enough to know what you were trying to say, but what you were saying was not what you likely meant. I assure you that my status as a "computer nerd" is not in question.
"Enough people understood the original statement that it was modded to +5."
I would actually attest that to your proper grammar and pro-Microsoft alternative stance. No offence meant to any specific moderating member, but if someone posts "Bill Gates blows goats, I have proof." in the top 10 posts, they will likely get rated +5 insightful.
-Rick
Your initial statement was that a large number of security people use Macs, there for, Macs are more secure. But that is not a true statement, because as I have pointed out there are very likely MORE security people using PCs than Macs, and PCs present the user with less secured experiences. The NUMBER of security people obviously does not have a cause relationship with secured experiences.
Your third statement was that a larger percentage of Mac users are security people, there for, Macs are more secure. That is a may be a true statement, the PERCENTAGE of security people may have a cause relationship with secured experiences.
Your first statement was inaccurate, that is all. You clarified, and you now have a statement that can be honestly and fairly researched and debated. Instead of blaiming readers for the missunderstanding, maybe you should review how you present your theory.
-Rick
I think your numbers were pulled directly from a dark orifice wrapped in cotton, but yes, I understand what you are saying. My problem is not with your claim, I agree that the average user will likely have a more secure experience on a Mac than a PC (note "more secure experience", not "more secure"), but with how you presented your point of view. You made an implication, you countered someone who called you on it, and now after a 2nd rebuttal you finally clarify your statement to the point where it is matching your logic.
-Rick
"What we need is a realistic free market playing field of open competition for anyone who wants to jump into the business."
The problem is that the phone industry isinherantly a monopolistic market. It takes a huge capitol investment it get into the market, which pretty much shuts out any small company entries. One of the things that scares me the most about the industry is that since the MaBell break up (which introduced some competition and reduced prices) the companies have slowly been re-merging to the point now where there are what, 3 primary land line phone carriers?
Free market and little regulation works wonderfully in most markets. I've rallied to the call of the free market many a times. But in industries where monopolies rule and competition, innovation, and low consumer prices are driven out, regulation is needed. A free (as in unregulated) market in the phone/backbone industry would result in a non-free (as in choice) market for the consumer.
-Rick
"Do you understand the concept of inclusive and exclusive? "You also, unfortunately, are targeting a lot of the security expert crowd..." does not in any way preclude most mac people being clueless. Because a lot of security people use macs does not mean that all mac users are security people. The former is obvious to anyone who attended a security conference in the last four years."
But that also means the inverse is true. If you say "a lot of security people use macs" and are not implying that Mac users are generally more secure because of it, then the statement might as well say "a lot of security people use Windows PCs." Because, a lot of "security people" use windows. I would wager a guess there are significantly MORE "security people" that use Windows than OSX.
Your statement was either meant to imply something, which can be questioned, Or it was with out merritt.
-Rick
I don't know, I really enjoyed Max Payne. True, it's no Quest for Glory, or Monkey Island, but as for a FPS with a story, I liked it.
-Rick
First off, my apologies for your modding, I think you have a valid point that is worth discussing even if I don't agree with it. I also do not assume that since we do not agree that you are for the erosion of our rights.
However:
"The two "freedoms" are not the same thing." and "the freedom to not be Muslim, to live under something other than the Islamic Caliphate"
I'm sure you will find that many of the freedoms (civil liberties) we take for granted are pretty well opposed to under Islamic Caliphate. The difference between the administrations erosion of our civil liberties and Muslim extremists attacking Western societies is not the religion, the difference is who is in charge once those civil liberties are gone. Religion is just a mask and a tool, used to hide the ambitions and give a political movement a manifest destiny. I stand by my statement that the enabling goals of both groups are the same (reducing freedom) and the objective goals only differ in who stands on the podium once the smoke settles.
-Rick
Exactly, anyone who tells you different is look at the past through rose colored history glasses. Which introduces the quandary, are there times that Terrorist acts are acceptable?
History is written by the winner. So in looking back, we see the fore fathers of the US as freedom fighters, but at the time the British saw them a Terrorists raising descent and destabilizing their territories.
-Rick
Now Ben, tell me all the ways the masked gun man with an AK-47 pointed at your head has destroyed your way of life. I mean, you can still go to work, raise a family, etc, the guy with the AK-47 pointed at you head the whole time hasn't prevented you from doing anything.
You just never know if, or when he will shoot. Same with the government. They have the power to detain you at the drop of the hat. The question I have for you is, do you wait until the gun man starts shooting to take his gun away? Do you wait for the government to start abusing there power before you place limits on them?
-Rick
While I agree that the most desired goal is religiously based, the administration (specificly Pres Bush) has stated that "Terrorists hate our freedom"
Here are a few other ways of looking at it:
Is the real freedom the administration of today want to take away is The Freedom To Not Have Conservative Christian Values?
Or is the administration themselves a terrorist threat as they use the threat of violence against individuals or property to intimidate society to achieve political objectives? True, they themselves are not perpetrating the violence, but they are saying things along the line of "vote for us, or there will be bloodshed." Sure, they wrap it up a little more pleasantly with things like, "Other political parties are pansies, only our political party care for your safety." But that sounds an awful lot like a protection racket coming from a neighborhood gang. "The police can't keep your store from burning down, only the Crazy 88s can protect you."
-Rick
As per the DOD: Terrorism is "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."
If Terrorist hate freedom and the Western way of life, it would be their political goal to reduce or remove our freedoms.
And out wonderful government, while attempting to fight against the terrorist have been slowly erroding our rights and freedoms.
So the harder our government fights, the more the terrorist win. Our government has done more to destroy our way of life than any terrorist organization ever could.
-Rick
"Not defending the charges in this case (which do seem 100% bogus)"
Problem is that by the law, they do not appear bogus. His best argument is probably going to be that the warning signs should have made the officer aware, and it would be up to the judge (and eventually jury) to determine if the cop should have taken notice of those signs. If the signs say nothing about the audio recording though, I don't think that would even fly.
The law is pretty straight forward, for the most part, unless you are an agent of the state, a communications worker, or other authorized party, it is a felony to record ("Intercept") an oral communication in the state of NH when any party being recorded is not aware of the recording. It is also a felony to attempt to use that record for pretty much any purpose.
The best turn out IMO would be that the guy gets convicted and sentenced to 1 hour community service. He then sues the police for harassment to pay for the legal fees. And the legislature takes up the cause of adjusting the law so that it is not illegal to record an agent of the state.
-Rick
'Mono' and 'Java'.
There is your key for getting application penetration on Linux and Windows.
-Rick
Think of it as a liability. What are the chances that you would be sued for showing the clip? What are the possible damages you would have to pay? If you show a clip of "Ground Hog Day" to a group of 20 attendees, will one of them rat you out to the copyright holder? Does the copyright holder have the means and desire to persue you? Do you have enough money to make it worth the copyright holder's time to sue you?
-Rick
To be fair though, I almost wrote "Tom Johnson"
-Rick
So how long until contracting Indie (independent) game dev studios become outsourced Indi (India) game dev studios?
-Rick
Yeah, that guy. He's so unimportant I couldn't even remember his name.
-Rick
That list is totally inaccurate. It's missing both Dvorak and John Thompson.
-Rick
Did I miss this memo? What happened to the whole "No taxation with out representation" deal? Is my senetor or congressman (along with reps from all 50 states) on the FCC board?
-Rick