Whatever you may think of their pricing models and market shares, it remains that Microsoft's net profit margin is 25% whereas Apple's is a mere 16%. (WolframAlpha)
SGI supported a handful of monitor models when there were only a handful of monitor models manufactured.
Windows supports thousands of monitor models with new ones introduced every day. It deals with a huge array of monitor aspect ratios and resolutions without user involvement by assuming 96dpi, which, on the vast majority of monitors, is close enough for non-technical applications.
Although some applications misbehave if you change the default font-size, changing dpi is transparent to all but the most poorly designed code (I have yet to run into an example personally). For code to work in inches and override the dpi setting is hard evidence that it was written by someone who'll make a lot of other really stupid mistakes; you don't want to use their product.
I don't know where you get X11 is more resilient because there is more variety of different values for the dpi, since Windows lets you set the dpi to anything you want and even provides an on-screen ruler that you can match up with a real ruler to get a precise value.
MediaWiki has a word processor that I can use to create large complex documents like Word does, send them to my clients, print them with layouts and typography that makes them a joy to read?
MediWiki has a world-class spreadsheet?
MediaWiki has a professional drawing package to compete with Visio?
MediaWiki has access control so that documents can be made accessible on a "need to know" basis?
No one is forcing your "Fortune 15" company to use SharePoint and fully-loaded office applications. They could use a geek toy instead (and ride to work on bicycles instead of BMWs). Your Corporate Architecture group made that decision. If you check, you'll find that they are actually qualified to make those kinds of decisions.
If you want to put it on that basis, it's a six trillion dollar sugar-and-starch-laden food industry. I was just referring to pharmaceutical insulin, for which the link was an advertisement.
Right on. I don't know what these guys think they've found (RTFA is no help) but converting fat into CO2 is what our bodies do normally.
Check out the Citric Acid Cycle: "In aerobic organisms, the citric acid cycle is part of a metabolic pathway involved in the chemical conversion of carbohydrates, fats and proteins into carbon dioxide and water to generate a form of usable energy."
A minor point you missed: by the time they hit your blood stream, sugars and starches have all been converted into sugar.
Another is that yes, your body does need some glucose, but it can easily synthesize what it needs. There's no such thing as an essential starch or sugar.
And another thing...In the often-convenient description of "n things laid end-to-end in a straight line would go so far" the maximum possible value of n is around 10^62.
Unfortunately, you run into the Planck limit (1.6 * 10^-35m) when you've hardly begun. The bar would need to be longer than the estimated diameter of the known universe. Isn't science fun?
IBM didn't take a cut-price route. IBM aimed the PC at business users at business-level prices (it was sometimes called the "Marvellous Office Machine"), and were taken completely by surprise when people took them home. Their reaction (can anyone say "Peanut+Chicklet") was a disaster and too late. The clones took over the home market and IBM never got an appreciable fraction of it.
Wisely, they focused on building well-engineered, reliable PC's for the business market they knew well (and took a shot at an equally high-quality OS). I was in the "PC's for business" business at the time and we used the IBM PC as a standard of engineering quality. The only machine we ever found that matched it was from Multitech, now Acer, and from what they told us, they had set out to do IBM one better (and succeeded). This made it possible to get IBM quality at 60% of IBM's price.
Slashdot Mirror
What the hell is an "intarweb"? I'm not up on Saturday morning cartoons. Did I miss something?
Of course they don't have the same culture to sell. Why would Microsoft play in Apple's diminutive park?
Think of Microsoft as Reitman's to Apple's Versace.
Microsoft is actually rely on a zillion of chinese hardware manufacturers and companies that pushes their Windows.
Or: Microsoft cleverly pushes off the low-margin stuff to a zillion chinese hardware manufacturers.
And it still gets width: wrong and doesn't support position: fixed.
Whatever you may think of their pricing models and market shares, it remains that Microsoft's net profit margin is 25% whereas Apple's is a mere 16%. (WolframAlpha)
Microsoft 1, Apple 0.
SGI supported a handful of monitor models when there were only a handful of monitor models manufactured.
Windows supports thousands of monitor models with new ones introduced every day. It deals with a huge array of monitor aspect ratios and resolutions without user involvement by assuming 96dpi, which, on the vast majority of monitors, is close enough for non-technical applications.
Although some applications misbehave if you change the default font-size, changing dpi is transparent to all but the most poorly designed code (I have yet to run into an example personally). For code to work in inches and override the dpi setting is hard evidence that it was written by someone who'll make a lot of other really stupid mistakes; you don't want to use their product.
I don't know where you get X11 is more resilient because there is more variety of different values for the dpi, since Windows lets you set the dpi to anything you want and even provides an on-screen ruler that you can match up with a real ruler to get a precise value.
This is an unclassified report because there is no way to classify it, and because it's the product of an anti-nuke organization.
Put together by the leaders of Australia and Japan, this report can best be described as a sales pitch.
What law?
Windows has provided the ability to tell it a screen's exact dpi since Win 95 or earlier. Display Properties | Settings | Advanced.
Actually, he has a brilliant solution: the card is used in a purpose-built reader.
Trick them into visiting a phishing site while they are standing at an ATM?! Good trick.
a web browser that doesn't execute attachments
Do you actually own a computer?
Sharepoint and fully-loaded office applications do.
You must have missed the "I like the ability to just click "Edit" and start editing a page. " part.
Wow! Microsoft is selling its software! Be still my heart!
Let me understand this:
No one is forcing your "Fortune 15" company to use SharePoint and fully-loaded office applications. They could use a geek toy instead (and ride to work on bicycles instead of BMWs). Your Corporate Architecture group made that decision. If you check, you'll find that they are actually qualified to make those kinds of decisions.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect strikes again.
More Noise = Less Compression
If you want to put it on that basis, it's a six trillion dollar sugar-and-starch-laden food industry. I was just referring to pharmaceutical insulin, for which the link was an advertisement.
Before you put too much stock in that, follow the money. If everyone went on low carbs, a two-billion dollar industry would come crashing to a halt.
Right on. I don't know what these guys think they've found (RTFA is no help) but converting fat into CO2 is what our bodies do normally.
Check out the Citric Acid Cycle: "In aerobic organisms, the citric acid cycle is part of a metabolic pathway involved in the chemical conversion of carbohydrates, fats and proteins into carbon dioxide and water to generate a form of usable energy."
A minor point you missed: by the time they hit your blood stream, sugars and starches have all been converted into sugar.
Another is that yes, your body does need some glucose, but it can easily synthesize what it needs. There's no such thing as an essential starch or sugar.
That's odd. I have a very clear memory of crashing a Bryant 2GB disk drive in 1970. And it was a lot bigger than a refrigerator.
This is called "delay-line memory". We used it on a variety of computers in the 50s.
And another thing...In the often-convenient description of "n things laid end-to-end in a straight line would go so far" the maximum possible value of n is around 10^62.
Unfortunately, you run into the Planck limit (1.6 * 10^-35m) when you've hardly begun. The bar would need to be longer than the estimated diameter of the known universe. Isn't science fun?
IBM didn't take a cut-price route. IBM aimed the PC at business users at business-level prices (it was sometimes called the "Marvellous Office Machine"), and were taken completely by surprise when people took them home. Their reaction (can anyone say "Peanut+Chicklet") was a disaster and too late. The clones took over the home market and IBM never got an appreciable fraction of it.
Wisely, they focused on building well-engineered, reliable PC's for the business market they knew well (and took a shot at an equally high-quality OS). I was in the "PC's for business" business at the time and we used the IBM PC as a standard of engineering quality. The only machine we ever found that matched it was from Multitech, now Acer, and from what they told us, they had set out to do IBM one better (and succeeded). This made it possible to get IBM quality at 60% of IBM's price.
If you were a salesman, engineer, or competent business analyst, you'd know that "good enough" always wins.