Linux is *not* user friendly, and until it is linux will stay with >1% marketshare. ... So, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that what seems easy and natural to Linux geeks is definitely not what regular people consider easy and natural. Hence, the preference towards Windows.
Ah, the new "Linux vs. Windows" SlashBot. Guaranteed to be on-topic 90% of the time... but there's an occasional miss.
God creates people. Some people hate God and want nothing to do with him. And God gives them what they want... they want to be apart from him for eternity, they get their wish. Seems more granting of desires than random outlashes of mass violence.
Thank God there's nothing like that in the Holy Bible!
It's all about promotion. If a movie promotes killing and sexual violence, then it is as bad as a video game doing the same. And not all books, movies, and video games that revolve around violent themes promote violence. Bible stories are a great example of this.
Anybody can build a word processor. Take a 1st year college kid's programming project. Add features. Add features. Repeat.
Exactly which college did you go where anything remotely resembling a spreadsheet was created by 1st year students? The closest thing I've seen is a calculator, and even that would have to be refactored highly in most cases, then transformed from a console app to a Windows form.
You may need to replace adding features with completely scrapping most of the program and adding hundreds of thousands of lines of code.
Will it be adopted by businesses around the world? Will it come standard on your Dells, HPs, and Macs? Will it look and feel practically identical to the current Microsoft Office? Will it be able to connect to Exchange and Sharepoint servers for collaboration?
If your answer to any of those questions is "No", I fear the answer to the headline will be the same.
The first duty of NASA was to beat the Soviet Union to major space milestones during the Cold War. Had it not been for our space initiatives, like the Apollo program or the Space Shuttle program, we may still be in the Cold War today. The Soviet Union realized they had no match for our scientific advances and that they could not keep pretending to be as powerful.
They see a nation that has previously sold chemical weapons to others to use, that has previously dropped not one but two nuclear bombs on concentrated population centres and sees none of the idealism of the invasion of Iraq that the US populace has been sold (it's about "freedom and democracy"), but only the US claiming the oil supply for themselves.
I love the stupidity of the argument that the US is just in it for the oil. Not saying you claimed the argument, but you're right, most of the world and half the US thinks the same thing.
Except, that argument doesn't hold up one bit. At the end of major conflict with Iraq, the average US gas price was $1.51 (May 5, 2003). As of September 5, 2005, the average price for gas in the US was $3.07. Crude oil went from $21.53 per barrel (May 2, 2003) to $59.84 per barrel (September 2, 2005), mirroring the world's averages of $22.04 to $60.75 at the same points of time. These figures come from the Energy Information Administation website.
Gas prices have more than doubled since the US declared an end to major conflict in Iraq, mirroring trends in the world economy. This is very inconsistent with the claim, "we went in it for the oil."
It's easy to look away and trust big companies and to skip tons of fine print. But if your contract allows them to change your product or service without penalty to them, and enforces early termination fees, you just signed a "bend over and take it" agreement.
It's not all about how good a product is. There are hundreds of products that could be considered as good or better than those created by Microsoft. It's really about fair product interoperability. That is, if Internet Explorer has hooks into the operating system, all competing applications should have access to those hooks, and an operating system should have all of its interfaces documented.
Also at question is Microsoft's strategy with OEMs of "We will give you substantial discounts on each copy of Windows you buy if 'Microsoft' is the only name a user sees when booting the computer, or accessing the Internet or media content." They can't guarantee a user won't just install Firefox or Winamp, but the user actually has to do something such as insert a CD or go to a website, download a file, and install. And it's amazing how many more users will use a program preinstalled on a computer over one they have to download from a website.
Microsoft stays in business by advertising its name on every box sold by major computer manufacturers. In the past, it was due to closed APIs. It really has never been by creating products that are better than any other, but I really hope that changes soon.
Yes, I use the Go menu (although rarely). If I close a browser and realize that I did not want to close it, going back to the page I was just visiting would otherwise mean I would have to open history, find the link to that page (which may not be in order of visit according to my history preferences), and close history again. Instead, I could do Alt-G (for Go menu) and choose from the list.
I would support getting rid of this menu if the back button were to hold history beyond the current process.
duel booting linux/windows is merely a crutch for those too weak to dump microsoft completely...
Perhaps you forget the many people who have to use Windows for the things that Linux doesn't really support, or support well. A few examples:
CS students who must use Visual Studio for class can't ditch Windows completely.
.NET programmers who may have to work at home, when Mono doesn't quite cut it, can't ditch Windows completely.
Those who provide tech support for Windows platforms can't ditch Windows completely.
And, last of all, many people recognize that Windows has some superior aspects to Linux. (I'm a Linux fan, I recommend it whenever asked... so no Windows bias here). Linux, BSD, OS X, and Windows all have great selling points, but none are perfect for everything. Generally speaking, Windows XP and OS X are the "most" perfect for desktop use, and their market shares show it.
The most published book in the history of the world is a compilation of first-hand accounts of this kind. Ok, so this is not proof.
Many people's lives have fundamentally been changed by Jesus, like a man I know who instantly changed from alcoholism to being 10 years without a drop. Ok, so this is not proof.
I personally have a relationship with Jesus. I can't see him, hear him, or touch him. But I feel him, and I know he's there by that relationship. Ok, so this is not proof.
You aren't going to get proof! At least, not in the form of hard physical evidence that you *and others* can simultaneously apply the scientific method to. I have plenty of proof in my life, but the only proof others see of Jesus in my life is my trust in him.
Think outside the box... instead of telling me how wrong I am, give him a chance. What's in it for me? Nothing at all, but what's in it for you is everything.
I don't speak for all people who believe in divine design, however I will share my personal thoughts.
I don't believe evolution is evil, impossible, or even wrong. We see it all the time. We see it in humans, animals, plants, whatever. It's proven, and humans can even encourage it in other species through breeding and laboratory methods.
Does that mean that God could not have made the earth, set it in motion thousands of years in the past, and what we see is a result? No. In fact, if everything does work through God's design, then he *created* evolution. Yes, this is a hard one for many to digest.
But then again, according to the nature he created, it would be so unlike him to create things that seemed so perfect on the outside. Humans are not perfect, neither is the weather nor that potted plant on the porch. And the beautiful thing is that the world works in perfect clockwork on the inside, at the atomic level and below, but God is powerful enough and has enough knowledge to make even clockwork seem random.
And for no other purpose than showing that he is God and can do such things, on such a level that none of us can even begin to comprehend. I'm not here to preach or to make everyone believe how I believe, but all who keep an open mind do themselves a favor in the long run.
Guess it sucks for you LOSERS who only use Linux. My copy of XP, with IE 7, is sure to make me a hit with all the ladies!
Look at all the advantages of IE 7 over Firefox.
1) Better security
2) Tabbed Browsing
3) More compatibility... wait...
DOH!
But it's still better, because I SAY SO! mIcR0$of+ ru135!
The obvious problem with your thinking is that
"Michigan" was not actually mentioned in the previous post's subject. It is inappropriate to leave Michigan out, which might leave people who don't read the post, let alone the article, without proper knowledge of something that applies to people who are less than half their age and citizens of a state they probably don't care about.
MD5, SHA1 are not encryption algorithms... they are hashing algorithms. They would not be used because it is possible (although unlikely) to find a collision. It's practically impossible to say that two email addresses cannot hash to the same value. Then you get into legal issues of "but my email address isn't on the list... can you prove it was really mine?"
Encrypted lists also don't work any better, technically. If it is stored internally where it can't be leaked, then it really doesn't matter if it's encrypted. That's only a safeguard for if the list does leak out, and it's as likely for the key to leak out just as fast or faster than the list itself.
Certainly, there are more Utah email addresses on spammers' lists than on anything the state could pull together. It would be virtually worthless to anyone who tried to safeguard the list.
Taking a theory (Darwin's) and turning it into fact (today's "science" of evolution) without proof conflicts directly with science. Or, taking something that has been proven or is obvious (natural selection) and generalizing it into something different (macro-evolution) is also not science.
Keeping your mind open to suggestions, by allowing both to be theory when neither have been proven, makes you a better scientist and open to ideas and viewpoints other than those taught to you by a narrow few.
(Disclaimer: I'm a Christian and I recognize the same can be said about many Christians who close their minds to the narrow viewpoints they've been taught. I consider this an incredible weakness in ministry because even if they are right, the point of Christianity is not proving creation, the flood, or other miracles, but rather showing love to others. 1 Corinthians 13)
Slashdot Mirror
...
So, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that what seems easy and natural to Linux geeks is definitely not what regular people consider easy and natural. Hence, the preference towards Windows.
Ah, the new "Linux vs. Windows" SlashBot. Guaranteed to be on-topic 90% of the time... but there's an occasional miss.
... 20 lawmakers were not enough to pass anything in either house of Congress. Why the worry?
That is, assuming you've done work (designing, developing, testing, etc.) on OpenOffice. Else, you really have no claim that it is yours.
God creates people. Some people hate God and want nothing to do with him. And God gives them what they want... they want to be apart from him for eternity, they get their wish. Seems more granting of desires than random outlashes of mass violence.
It's all about promotion. If a movie promotes killing and sexual violence, then it is as bad as a video game doing the same. And not all books, movies, and video games that revolve around violent themes promote violence. Bible stories are a great example of this.
HP Desktop PCs & HP Workstations
Exactly which college did you go where anything remotely resembling a spreadsheet was created by 1st year students? The closest thing I've seen is a calculator, and even that would have to be refactored highly in most cases, then transformed from a console app to a Windows form.
You may need to replace adding features with completely scrapping most of the program and adding hundreds of thousands of lines of code.
Will it be adopted by businesses around the world? Will it come standard on your Dells, HPs, and Macs? Will it look and feel practically identical to the current Microsoft Office? Will it be able to connect to Exchange and Sharepoint servers for collaboration?
If your answer to any of those questions is "No", I fear the answer to the headline will be the same.
The first duty of NASA was to beat the Soviet Union to major space milestones during the Cold War. Had it not been for our space initiatives, like the Apollo program or the Space Shuttle program, we may still be in the Cold War today. The Soviet Union realized they had no match for our scientific advances and that they could not keep pretending to be as powerful.
...the iPod Pico.
They see a nation that has previously sold chemical weapons to others to use, that has previously dropped not one but two nuclear bombs on concentrated population centres and sees none of the idealism of the invasion of Iraq that the US populace has been sold (it's about "freedom and democracy"), but only the US claiming the oil supply for themselves.
I love the stupidity of the argument that the US is just in it for the oil. Not saying you claimed the argument, but you're right, most of the world and half the US thinks the same thing.
Except, that argument doesn't hold up one bit. At the end of major conflict with Iraq, the average US gas price was $1.51 (May 5, 2003). As of September 5, 2005, the average price for gas in the US was $3.07. Crude oil went from $21.53 per barrel (May 2, 2003) to $59.84 per barrel (September 2, 2005), mirroring the world's averages of $22.04 to $60.75 at the same points of time. These figures come from the Energy Information Administation website.
Gas prices have more than doubled since the US declared an end to major conflict in Iraq, mirroring trends in the world economy. This is very inconsistent with the claim, "we went in it for the oil."
Read the contract.
It's easy to look away and trust big companies and to skip tons of fine print. But if your contract allows them to change your product or service without penalty to them, and enforces early termination fees, you just signed a "bend over and take it" agreement.
... that most people prefer people like themselves anyway. So is this really different from society in general?
It's not all about how good a product is. There are hundreds of products that could be considered as good or better than those created by Microsoft. It's really about fair product interoperability. That is, if Internet Explorer has hooks into the operating system, all competing applications should have access to those hooks, and an operating system should have all of its interfaces documented.
Also at question is Microsoft's strategy with OEMs of "We will give you substantial discounts on each copy of Windows you buy if 'Microsoft' is the only name a user sees when booting the computer, or accessing the Internet or media content." They can't guarantee a user won't just install Firefox or Winamp, but the user actually has to do something such as insert a CD or go to a website, download a file, and install. And it's amazing how many more users will use a program preinstalled on a computer over one they have to download from a website.
Microsoft stays in business by advertising its name on every box sold by major computer manufacturers. In the past, it was due to closed APIs. It really has never been by creating products that are better than any other, but I really hope that changes soon.
I'll take just $10 Million of it, and not only install it, but tell everyone I LIKE IT.
AND... I won't even install Firefox.
Beat that!
Yes, I use the Go menu (although rarely). If I close a browser and realize that I did not want to close it, going back to the page I was just visiting would otherwise mean I would have to open history, find the link to that page (which may not be in order of visit according to my history preferences), and close history again. Instead, I could do Alt-G (for Go menu) and choose from the list.
I would support getting rid of this menu if the back button were to hold history beyond the current process.
Perhaps you forget the many people who have to use Windows for the things that Linux doesn't really support, or support well. A few examples:
-
CS students who must use Visual Studio for class can't ditch Windows completely.
.NET programmers who may have to work at home, when Mono doesn't quite cut it, can't ditch Windows completely.
-
Those who provide tech support for Windows platforms can't ditch Windows completely.
And, last of all, many people recognize that Windows has some superior aspects to Linux. (I'm a Linux fan, I recommend it whenever asked... so no Windows bias here). Linux, BSD, OS X, and Windows all have great selling points, but none are perfect for everything. Generally speaking, Windows XP and OS X are the "most" perfect for desktop use, and their market shares show it.Nobody has ever seen? Are you kidding me?
The most published book in the history of the world is a compilation of first-hand accounts of this kind. Ok, so this is not proof.
Many people's lives have fundamentally been changed by Jesus, like a man I know who instantly changed from alcoholism to being 10 years without a drop. Ok, so this is not proof.
I personally have a relationship with Jesus. I can't see him, hear him, or touch him. But I feel him, and I know he's there by that relationship. Ok, so this is not proof.
You aren't going to get proof! At least, not in the form of hard physical evidence that you *and others* can simultaneously apply the scientific method to. I have plenty of proof in my life, but the only proof others see of Jesus in my life is my trust in him.
Think outside the box... instead of telling me how wrong I am, give him a chance. What's in it for me? Nothing at all, but what's in it for you is everything.
I don't speak for all people who believe in divine design, however I will share my personal thoughts.
I don't believe evolution is evil, impossible, or even wrong. We see it all the time. We see it in humans, animals, plants, whatever. It's proven, and humans can even encourage it in other species through breeding and laboratory methods.
Does that mean that God could not have made the earth, set it in motion thousands of years in the past, and what we see is a result? No. In fact, if everything does work through God's design, then he *created* evolution. Yes, this is a hard one for many to digest.
But then again, according to the nature he created, it would be so unlike him to create things that seemed so perfect on the outside. Humans are not perfect, neither is the weather nor that potted plant on the porch. And the beautiful thing is that the world works in perfect clockwork on the inside, at the atomic level and below, but God is powerful enough and has enough knowledge to make even clockwork seem random.
And for no other purpose than showing that he is God and can do such things, on such a level that none of us can even begin to comprehend. I'm not here to preach or to make everyone believe how I believe, but all who keep an open mind do themselves a favor in the long run.
Guess it sucks for you LOSERS who only use Linux. My copy of XP, with IE 7, is sure to make me a hit with all the ladies! Look at all the advantages of IE 7 over Firefox. 1) Better security 2) Tabbed Browsing 3) More compatibility ... wait...
DOH!
But it's still better, because I SAY SO! mIcR0$of+ ru135!
PROOF that Slashdot submitters have access to previous stories!
Who knew, dupes really aren't necessary after all.
The obvious problem with your thinking is that "Michigan" was not actually mentioned in the previous post's subject. It is inappropriate to leave Michigan out, which might leave people who don't read the post, let alone the article, without proper knowledge of something that applies to people who are less than half their age and citizens of a state they probably don't care about.
MD5, SHA1 are not encryption algorithms... they are hashing algorithms. They would not be used because it is possible (although unlikely) to find a collision. It's practically impossible to say that two email addresses cannot hash to the same value. Then you get into legal issues of "but my email address isn't on the list... can you prove it was really mine?"
Encrypted lists also don't work any better, technically. If it is stored internally where it can't be leaked, then it really doesn't matter if it's encrypted. That's only a safeguard for if the list does leak out, and it's as likely for the key to leak out just as fast or faster than the list itself.
Certainly, there are more Utah email addresses on spammers' lists than on anything the state could pull together. It would be virtually worthless to anyone who tried to safeguard the list.
Real science and the Bible have yet to conflict.
Taking a theory (Darwin's) and turning it into fact (today's "science" of evolution) without proof conflicts directly with science. Or, taking something that has been proven or is obvious (natural selection) and generalizing it into something different (macro-evolution) is also not science.
Keeping your mind open to suggestions, by allowing both to be theory when neither have been proven, makes you a better scientist and open to ideas and viewpoints other than those taught to you by a narrow few.
(Disclaimer: I'm a Christian and I recognize the same can be said about many Christians who close their minds to the narrow viewpoints they've been taught. I consider this an incredible weakness in ministry because even if they are right, the point of Christianity is not proving creation, the flood, or other miracles, but rather showing love to others. 1 Corinthians 13)