"Or I can wait twenty years and they'll have a nanobot one for free in my Corkflakes (sans SCSI)."
Corkflakes??
Is there going to be a corn shortage in the future due to global warming or will we find out that cork is not only high in fiber, but is great for your cholesterol!!
I never said EVERY.Mac member would meet the criteria for this exploit to happen. However, for you to state that the probability of this happening is akin to getting struck by lightning is absurd and a BLIND DISMISSAL of the POTENTIAL for this to happen. Frankly, if such a user were to do this at a common terminal at work, it is not unlikely that a nosy co-worker might actually stumble upon this bug. It doesn't take a malicious individual. It only takes a nosy one. Look around you. This world is full of them.
So, again, why are you so dismissive of a POTENTIAL breach of a user's privacy just because it is Apple? Apple's products have not been claimed to be perfect in a literal sense, however it is the biased actions of fanbois that portray that virtual perfection. To bash MS for every little issue they have and turn around and excuse Apple for ANY issue they have is hypocritical and tiring.
Some of us on/. get sick of seeing the double-standard and occasionally speak up about it. Not that it does any good, because the fanbois are so entrenched in their dogma that a logical and coherent argument never penetrates.
"So the sequence is IF you use a Mac and IF you're a.Mac member and IF you use iDisk and IF you check your iDisk from a public browser THEN someone could potentially access those files."
"Sorry, but the aggregate of all of those conditions is probably 0.000001%."
Yet again. You will sidestep the issue of their being a flaw by claiming it affects NO ONE.
Let me get this right...someone who has a Mac might also have a.Mac account (someone is using this service). Furthermore, since that person pays $99/year for that service, he may actually want to take advantage of the iDisk feature. Guess what? He MIGHT actually want to get to something stored in his iDisk account while away from his own computers.
I mean really...you SERIOUSLY believe your probability that this LOGICAL series of events is "0.000001%?????"
"As such your entire anti-fanboi rant is pretty much just a strawman setup so you can knock him down, and pat yourself on the back in the process."
I'M the one throwing up a ridiculous argument?? It is fanbois like you that I'm talking about. Just acknowledge the fact that, while this may not be a "major flaw", it IS "worth discussing". ANY flaw in ANY software that allows others to access your private data should be public knowledge so that the users may protect themselves until a fix can be applied. I don't care who made the software. I just can't stand the hypocritical views of the Mac users on/. who will blindly dismiss any wrong-doings by Apple. It's pathetic.
Offtopic?? Inappropriately worded??? Are you serious!?!?
So it is OK to just delete posts from a user forum because the moderator thinks the post is "inappropriately worded"?
Well, the content of the post was relevant, but the poster didn't use proper grammar. I guess I'll just delete the post!
Even if it was offtopic, how many forums just delete a post! You tell the user to post in the proper forum. Some forum moderators will even move the post to the proper forum. However, I don't use any forum that just goes in and deletes a post unless the content is offensive. I guess a user posting a "possible" vulnerability was offensive to the Apple moderator.
Conspiracy? Grow up. I am addressing what I consider inappropriate handling of a post in a forum. You seem to think that a post being deleted is fine. Maybe I can have privileges on/. to delete YOUR posts whenever I feel like it. Would that bother you???
You can try all the diversion tactics you want, but at the end of the day the post was DELETED to remove the public announcement of a vulnerability!!! So, whoever deleted the post must have done it for a reason?
If they thought it was a REAL bug and deleted the post to remove it from the public eye, then that shows Apple is more concerned with their public image than the security of their products.
If they thought it was NOT a real bug and just a user error and deleted the post, then they did nothing to assist the user in error. That doesn't sound like very good technical support to me.
You know the fanboi is well aware of the drivel he spews when he resorts to defending Apple anonymously.
"I think it's minor because no one actually uses.mac, let alone an iDisk."
So, your first defense: Nobody uses this feature so it is not really a flaw! You're right Apple just promotes the.Mac service to maintain an ILLUSION. None of the I-can't-tie-my-shoes-without-Apple-doing-it-for-me users have a.Mac account. I have a co-worker that is just one of those people.
"and if such things were an actual threat they'd be using "Private Browsing...", "Reset Safari..." or "Empty Cache..." features already built into Safari."
Next, There can't be a threat because IF there really IS a flaw in an Apple product, they would have fixed it. Therefore, it is not a threat!
Excellent logic there! Because Apple is infallible, there are NEVER flaws in their products! They catch ALL bugs in their software before it is released.
"also if you want a Microsoft comparison"
Now that you have dismissed the POSSIBILITY that there may be a flaw in an Apple product, you try to redirect the attention to M$. Nothing to see here...please move along.
"It seems to be the case that any security related articles no matter how dismal or indistinct to the apple platform float right to the top of the press."
Gee...I wonder why. If all the fanbois didn't run around exclaiming how PERFECT Apple is, maybe the rest of the world wouldn't be so inclined to throw the spotlight on any and all issues that arise with an Apple product. Just wait. I noticed how many rebuttals in this thread to the current market share that Apple owns. As Apple's footprint grows, so will the scrutiny placed on their products.
"What's the point? It's the equivalent of when people had CompuServe in the early-to-mid 90s. They'd pay through the nose to use a proprietary web browser and get access to groups that only other CIS users could use. It's the internet for people that don't know what's out there for nowt, a gated net community."
hmmm...sounds familiar...what was the name of that?
"It's difficult to spend money advertising a product when that product is free"
No, it is not. Opera is a publicly traded company with multiple revenue streams. They are not some little open-source group working out of their parents' basement. They can afford to advertise. Especially considering some of their partners partners in the desktop browser market: Adobe, SlipStream, Google, eBay, etc . Not to mention their partners in the mobile market: Casio, Nokia, Motorola, etc.
"ZoneAlarm isn't free." - I'm using the FREE version of ZoneAlarm right now.
"Opera's own press release claims they would be satisfied if IE was unbundled (notice the "and/or" in the quote in the summary above). The far more important point is web standards. I truly believe Opera is more concerned about standards than marketshare."
Really, from Opera's 3rd Quarter 2007 Financial Report (pdf): "Revenues from the Desktop segment increased 113% in 3Q07 compared to 3Q06 as global usage continues to grow." Opera is a company with stock holders. They are out to make money just like MS.
"To be fair, most of these people probably wouldn't understand the usefulness or benefit of using something other than IE, but you could argue (successfully, IMO) that they know no better because Microsoft has made it that way."
Here's an idea: The companies producing the other browsers could ADVERTISE their product!! Is that not what most companies do when they want to sell something? They inform the consumer of the product they offer and how they will be much better off using Brand X over Brand Y.
Windows has a firewall built in, but ZoneAlarm and other firewall products are advertised as being the better option for the user.
Basically, Opera wants free injection into MS product to avoid the costs of advertisement. Give me an example of another industry leader that is not only required to advertise a competitor's product, but bundle that product as well.
"This is why I didn't want to continue this discussion with you: [my obvious deflection of your counter-argument] are preventing [me] from having a logical, rational discussion."
There...fixed that for you. I put forward a reasonable response to your broad positional statements. If you would like to clarify your position, then I may be able to address you more acutely.
I'm not talking about the touchy-feely new-age psychobabble that has permeated our society. That tells everyone that their inner-child is fragile and they just need to take some meds to make it all better.
However, if you "fundamentally" disagree that a young child being molested isn't seriously screwed up emotionally by the experience, then you have some serious issues yourself.
While I understand the argument that males are genetically predisposed to rape as an evolutionary adaptation, the theories of evolutionary psychology are controversial at best. If you want to justify rape with genetic predisposition, then you should go all the way and leave all your modern living behind. Move to a remote area of the wilderness and live as an animal, because that is what you are proposing. Humans are different from the other animals on this planet because of our intellect. We have the ability to determine what "primal urges" are acceptable to act upon, and which are not. Even though I may see a beautiful woman that I would like to procreate with to further my genetic line. I know that I may not act upon that predisposed urge. I don't need society to tell me it is wrong. I KNOW it is wrong.
"So punishments will get harsher and harsher, and there will still be people saying it's not enough."
As far as rapists, especially child rapists, go, the punishment usually is NOT severe enough. When someone is raped, they are scarred for life. They will have to live with the emotional damage inflicted on them for years after the physical wounds have healed. I would have to guess that a rape victim NEVER gets over what has been done to them. Not to mention if they actually get pregnant from the rapist, that just adds a whole new layer of anguish they must suffer. Now think of a young child who does not even have the mental development to begin to understand how to process what has happened to them. These kids are sentenced to a life of emotional trauma.
So what punishment is TOO much for a person who is so evil, sick and twisted that they could do such a thing to another human being?
"Please don't forget about things like the scientific method, deterrence, rehabilitation and proactive assistance for potential criminals."
What deterrence is there for someone twisted enough to prey on the most innocent and helpless of our society? How do you rehabilitate someone who believes it is their expression of LOVE to fondle little boys?? I have a 7 year-old daughter, and I would beat someone to a bloody pulp if they touched my little girl. Don't tell me about excessive punishment for these monsters. There is no such thing!
You are in good financial shape by the sound of it. However, there are many, many people out there who cannot even afford
to save for emergencies, retirement or anything else. They live paycheck to paycheck just to make ends meet. What happens when their car breaks down and they can't get to work or to the store? They put the charge on the card. What happens if their back goes out at work and they are laid up for two months getting short-term disability from their employer that isn't even half of what they actually make? They use their card
to buy the groceries and pay the electric bill.
It is easy to sit back and point at others and say they should be more responsible when you are not in the position of losing everything due to bad luck. There are many who are just plain irresponsible with their credit, and much of that can be credited (pun intended) to the CC companies and the tactics they use. Also, the lack of education for young adults on how to be financially responsible doesn't help.
No one forces you to place charges on your CC. That is true. But for many of the CC companies' target customers, they are hovering at the break even point week in and week out. The CC is the little crutch that allows them to get by till payday, just as the CC company wants it. Then, one bad thing happens and you are slowly sinking into the debt pit and the CC companies are waiting to start shoveling the dirt in on top of you.
I have little sympathy for those who live beyond their means just to have an image of success. I have NO sympathy for the blood-sucking parasites that run the CC companies.
Indeed. Furthermore, there will be an ongoing demand for these albums.
The music of these bands(ie. Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, Black Sabbath)are the foundation upon which everything remotely classified as Rock since then is based upon.
Directly or Indirectly.
Period.
Why would they sell the albums considered as masterpieces (ie. White Album)for less than the latest cookie-cutter band's CD?
I didn't take his post as an advocation for bullying. Rather, the reality of the world is that there are bullies out there.
You don't always get what you want in life, and generally life can be a motherfucker at times. What we don't need to do is teach our
children that the world is how we would LIKE it to be. We need to work towards this Utopia that some of us might envision, but we prepare them
for the hard, cold reality: the Utopia will likely never exist.
When you raise a child with the delusions that everyone will treat them fairly and there are no losers in life, then you are breeding a
generation of people who do not know how to deal with adversity. These are some of the people who end up shooting others because they cannot
cope with the reality of an imperfect world.
"For example, there is no crappy MS "activation" crap with OS X. I could use my OS X install DVD's and install OS X on any number of Macs, no questions asked, and most importantly, no crappy "activation"."
There is a good reason for the difference between Apple and MS (in relation to how they control their respective OS): Apple makes OS X to run on their hardware ONLY. Therefore, if you are installing on ANY Mac, they have already made their money from the hardware. Remember, they are a hardware company.
MS, on the other hand, makes an OS that runs on ANY PC. They don't sell the hardware, so they try to make sure you have purchased the software. That's where they make their money.
You have to look at the reason why each company chooses to implement DRM or any other form of IP control.
That may be true, but there is software that is used in critical applications everday.
The same people riding that airplane that was designed by a "professional engineer" are relying on software as well.
The safety and security of a structure or a piece of code is not contingent upon the credentials of an individual,
but how well the individual did his job in formulating his work and testing the results.
Software Engineers may not have an equivalent PE exam at this time, but there are organizations (ACM is one) trying to establish the
accountability among the community that the PE exam is supposed to provide.
Do not judge others based on a set of standards that do not even apply to them. I'm quite certain that civil and mechanical engineers do not send out their first set of blueprints as the finished product. I would gather that they test their design to ensure it meets the required standards. This is also the case for software engineers.
In addition, everything that is designed by civil and mechanical engineers do not require the same measures of safety. The same holds true with software. Some applications are more critical than others.
Just remember, there are morons in every profession.
"Most users get a new computer when the existing one will not easily do a new task."
That is the crux of the argument. Not counting the Adam computer I had in the early '80s, my first "real" PC was a Dell 266 MHz Pentium II that I purchased in 1997. Although I chose to make some upgrades to the system over time (CD burner and RAM), the Dell worked well for me for almost 6 years before I had to get a new computer. The only reason I was forced to buy a new one then was to run Visual Studio 2003 for my CS classes. The system is still functional for basic use (word and internet), although it is a bit sluggish.
My point is that the common man using a PC will not buy a new system until theirs dies or becomes too much of a hassle. They view them like cars. The more advanced users will perform upgrades to get the most out of the hardware they have already rather than start from scratch.
"Most users do not have the desire nor capability to install a wireless interface."
I think most users CAN plug a USB wireless adapter into their computer and run a setup disc. My ex-father-in-law is 76 and was able to do this. (Sorry for the ANECDOTE!:) ) I don't think wireless is enough of a reason to go out and buy a new system. There are generally multiple problems that arise which make it more economical to just buy a new PC because they are so much cheaper than Macs. In reality, consumers buy new systems for many reasons and whether they truly NEED a new PC or just WANT the latest and greatest hardware is a big factor as well.
Lastly, older Macs go for more than PCs on ebay because they cost more than PCs when they are new as well. That doesn't necessarily make them better. I can purchase at least two PCs versus one Mac of comparable specs. Just because people are willing to pay for the included "I'm cool because I use a Mac" price mark-up, that does not translate to the Mac being more useful.
Sorry, but macs are not "immune to viruses". Just because macs are not targeted like Windows, does not mean they are immune.
Just because a rattlesnake has not bitten my leg, that does not mean I am immune to their poison.
Obviously, I think Macs`are more secure than Windows boxes; however, that may be due more to the fact that they are not targeted like PCs. If there were as many Macs being used by corporations and households as there are PCs, we might find that Macs are not as secure as we think they are.
Remember, the Titanic was said to be unsinkable until it hit that iceburg. One day, Apple might hit an iceburg of their own.
Slashdot Mirror
"Or I can wait twenty years and they'll have a nanobot one for free in my Corkflakes (sans SCSI)."
Corkflakes??
Is there going to be a corn shortage in the future due to global warming or will we find out that cork is not only high in fiber, but is great for your cholesterol!!
I never said EVERY .Mac member would meet the criteria for this exploit to happen.
/. get sick of seeing the double-standard and occasionally speak up about it. Not that it does any good, because the fanbois are so entrenched in their dogma that a logical and coherent argument never penetrates.
However, for you to state that the probability of this happening is akin to getting struck by lightning is absurd and a BLIND DISMISSAL of the POTENTIAL for this to happen.
Frankly, if such a user were to do this at a common terminal at work, it is not unlikely that a nosy co-worker might actually stumble upon this bug.
It doesn't take a malicious individual. It only takes a nosy one. Look around you. This world is full of them.
So, again, why are you so dismissive of a POTENTIAL breach of a user's privacy just because it is Apple?
Apple's products have not been claimed to be perfect in a literal sense, however it is the biased actions of fanbois that portray that virtual perfection.
To bash MS for every little issue they have and turn around and excuse Apple for ANY issue they have is hypocritical and tiring.
Some of us on
"So the sequence is IF you use a Mac and IF you're a .Mac member and IF you use iDisk and IF you check your iDisk from a public browser THEN someone could potentially access those files."
.Mac account (someone is using this service). Furthermore, since that person pays $99/year for that service, he may actually want to take advantage of the iDisk feature. Guess what? He MIGHT actually want to get to something stored in his iDisk account while away from his own computers.
/. who will blindly dismiss any wrong-doings by Apple. It's pathetic.
"Sorry, but the aggregate of all of those conditions is probably 0.000001%."
Yet again. You will sidestep the issue of their being a flaw by claiming it affects NO ONE.
Let me get this right...someone who has a Mac might also have a
I mean really...you SERIOUSLY believe your probability that this LOGICAL series of events is "0.000001%?????"
"As such your entire anti-fanboi rant is pretty much just a strawman setup so you can knock him down, and pat yourself on the back in the process."
I'M the one throwing up a ridiculous argument?? It is fanbois like you that I'm talking about. Just acknowledge the fact that, while this may not be a "major flaw", it IS "worth discussing".
ANY flaw in ANY software that allows others to access your private data should be public knowledge so that the users may protect themselves until a fix can be applied. I don't care who made the software.
I just can't stand the hypocritical views of the Mac users on
Offtopic?? Inappropriately worded??? Are you serious!?!?
/. to delete YOUR posts whenever I feel like it. Would that bother you???
So it is OK to just delete posts from a user forum because the moderator thinks the post is "inappropriately worded"?
Well, the content of the post was relevant, but the poster didn't use proper grammar. I guess I'll just delete the post!
Even if it was offtopic, how many forums just delete a post! You tell the user to post in the proper forum. Some forum moderators will even move the post to the proper forum. However, I don't use any forum that just goes in and deletes a post unless the content is offensive. I guess a user posting a "possible" vulnerability was offensive to the Apple moderator.
Conspiracy? Grow up. I am addressing what I consider inappropriate handling of a post in a forum. You seem to think that a post being deleted is fine.
Maybe I can have privileges on
BINGO!!! Give this AC a cookie!
You can try all the diversion tactics you want, but at the end of the day the post was DELETED to remove the public announcement of a vulnerability!!!
So, whoever deleted the post must have done it for a reason?
If they thought it was a REAL bug and deleted the post to remove it from the public eye, then that shows Apple is more concerned with their public image than the security of their products.
If they thought it was NOT a real bug and just a user error and deleted the post, then they did nothing to assist the user in error. That doesn't sound like very good technical support to me.
You know the fanboi is well aware of the drivel he spews when he resorts to defending Apple anonymously.
.mac, let alone an iDisk." .Mac service to maintain an ILLUSION. .Mac account. I have a co-worker that is just one of those people.
"I think it's minor because no one actually uses
So, your first defense: Nobody uses this feature so it is not really a flaw! You're right Apple just promotes the
None of the I-can't-tie-my-shoes-without-Apple-doing-it-for-me users have a
"and if such things were an actual threat they'd be using "Private Browsing...", "Reset Safari..." or "Empty Cache..." features already built into Safari."
Next, There can't be a threat because IF there really IS a flaw in an Apple product, they would have fixed it. Therefore, it is not a threat!
Excellent logic there! Because Apple is infallible, there are NEVER flaws in their products! They catch ALL bugs in their software before it is released.
"also if you want a Microsoft comparison"
Now that you have dismissed the POSSIBILITY that there may be a flaw in an Apple product, you try to redirect the attention to M$. Nothing to see here...please move along.
"It seems to be the case that any security related articles no matter how dismal or indistinct to the apple platform float right to the top of the press."
Gee...I wonder why. If all the fanbois didn't run around exclaiming how PERFECT Apple is, maybe the rest of the world wouldn't be so inclined to throw the spotlight on any and all issues that arise with an Apple product. Just wait. I noticed how many rebuttals in this thread to the current market share that Apple owns. As Apple's footprint grows, so will the scrutiny placed on their products.
"What's the point? It's the equivalent of when people had CompuServe in the early-to-mid 90s. They'd pay through the nose to use a proprietary web browser and get access to groups that only other CIS users could use. It's the internet for people that don't know what's out there for nowt, a gated net community."
hmmm...sounds familiar...what was the name of that?
Ah, Oh weLl.
I can't remember right now.
"It's difficult to spend money advertising a product when that product is free"
No, it is not. Opera is a publicly traded company with multiple revenue streams. They are not some little open-source group working out of their parents' basement. They can afford to advertise. Especially considering some of their partners partners in the desktop browser market: Adobe, SlipStream, Google, eBay, etc . Not to mention their partners in the mobile market: Casio, Nokia, Motorola, etc.
"ZoneAlarm isn't free." - I'm using the FREE version of ZoneAlarm right now.
"Opera's own press release claims they would be satisfied if IE was unbundled (notice the "and/or" in the quote in the summary above). The far more important point is web standards. I truly believe Opera is more concerned about standards than marketshare."
Really, from Opera's 3rd Quarter 2007 Financial Report (pdf): "Revenues from the Desktop segment increased 113% in 3Q07 compared to 3Q06 as global usage continues to grow."
Opera is a company with stock holders. They are out to make money just like MS.
"To be fair, most of these people probably wouldn't understand the usefulness or benefit of using something other than IE, but you could argue (successfully, IMO) that they know no better because Microsoft has made it that way."
Here's an idea: The companies producing the other browsers could ADVERTISE their product!! Is that not what most companies do when they want to sell something? They inform the consumer of the product they offer and how they will be much better off using Brand X over Brand Y.
Windows has a firewall built in, but ZoneAlarm and other firewall products are advertised as being the better option for the user.
Basically, Opera wants free injection into MS product to avoid the costs of advertisement. Give me an example of another industry leader that is not only required to advertise a competitor's product, but bundle that product as well.
"This is why I didn't want to continue this discussion with you: [my obvious deflection of your counter-argument] are preventing [me] from having a logical, rational discussion."
There...fixed that for you. I put forward a reasonable response to your broad positional statements. If you would like to clarify your position, then I may be able to address you more acutely.
I'm not talking about the touchy-feely new-age psychobabble that has permeated our society. That tells everyone that their inner-child is fragile and they just need to take some meds to make it all better.
However, if you "fundamentally" disagree that a young child being molested isn't seriously screwed up emotionally by the experience, then you have some serious issues yourself.
While I understand the argument that males are genetically predisposed to rape as an evolutionary adaptation, the theories of evolutionary psychology are controversial at best. If you want to justify rape with genetic predisposition, then you should go all the way and leave all your modern living behind. Move to a remote area of the wilderness and live as an animal, because that is what you are proposing. Humans are different from the other animals on this planet because of our intellect. We have the ability to determine what "primal urges" are acceptable to act upon, and which are not. Even though I may see a beautiful woman that I would like to procreate with to further my genetic line. I know that I may not act upon that predisposed urge. I don't need society to tell me it is wrong. I KNOW it is wrong.
What is sad is that you appear not to.
"So punishments will get harsher and harsher, and there will still be people saying it's not enough."
As far as rapists, especially child rapists, go, the punishment usually is NOT severe enough. When someone is raped, they are scarred for life. They will have to live with the emotional damage inflicted on them for years after the physical wounds have healed. I would have to guess that a rape victim NEVER gets over what has been done to them. Not to mention if they actually get pregnant from the rapist, that just adds a whole new layer of anguish they must suffer. Now think of a young child who does not even have the mental development to begin to understand how to process what has happened to them. These kids are sentenced to a life of emotional trauma.
So what punishment is TOO much for a person who is so evil, sick and twisted that they could do such a thing to another human being?
"Please don't forget about things like the scientific method, deterrence, rehabilitation and proactive assistance for potential criminals."
What deterrence is there for someone twisted enough to prey on the most innocent and helpless of our society? How do you rehabilitate someone who believes it is their expression of LOVE to fondle little boys?? I have a 7 year-old daughter, and I would beat someone to a bloody pulp if they touched my little girl. Don't tell me about excessive punishment for these monsters. There is no such thing!
"Being put in jail is not violent, so its not violence deterring anyone."
Jail is not violent???
Tell that to the guys in prison getting raped in the ass daily.
I don't know about you, but that is enough to deter me!
I wish I had mod points!!
You managed Funny and Insightful in so few words. Bravo, sir! Bravo!
You are in good financial shape by the sound of it. However, there are many, many people out there who cannot even afford
to save for emergencies, retirement or anything else. They live paycheck to paycheck just to make ends meet. What happens when their car breaks down and they
can't get to work or to the store? They put the charge on the card. What happens if their back goes out at work and they are laid up
for two months getting short-term disability from their employer that isn't even half of what they actually make? They use their card
to buy the groceries and pay the electric bill.
It is easy to sit back and point at others and say they should be more responsible when you are not in the position of losing
everything due to bad luck. There are many who are just plain irresponsible with their credit, and much of that can be credited (pun intended)
to the CC companies and the tactics they use. Also, the lack of education for young adults on how to be financially responsible doesn't help.
No one forces you to place charges on your CC. That is true. But for many of the CC companies' target customers, they are hovering
at the break even point week in and week out. The CC is the little crutch that allows them to get by till payday,
just as the CC company wants it. Then, one bad thing happens and you are slowly sinking into the debt pit and the CC companies
are waiting to start shoveling the dirt in on top of you.
I have little sympathy for those who live beyond their means just to have an image of success. I have NO sympathy for the
blood-sucking parasites that run the CC companies.
Indeed. Furthermore, there will be an ongoing demand for these albums.
The music of these bands(ie. Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, Black Sabbath)are the foundation upon which everything remotely classified as Rock since then is based upon.
Directly or Indirectly.
Period.
Why would they sell the albums considered as masterpieces (ie. White Album)for less than the latest cookie-cutter band's CD?
I didn't take his post as an advocation for bullying. Rather, the reality of the world is that there are bullies out there.
You don't always get what you want in life, and generally life can be a motherfucker at times. What we don't need to do is teach our
children that the world is how we would LIKE it to be. We need to work towards this Utopia that some of us might envision, but we prepare them
for the hard, cold reality: the Utopia will likely never exist.
When you raise a child with the delusions that everyone will treat them fairly and there are no losers in life, then you are breeding a
generation of people who do not know how to deal with adversity. These are some of the people who end up shooting others because they cannot
cope with the reality of an imperfect world.
"For example, there is no crappy MS "activation" crap with OS X. I could use my OS X install DVD's and install OS X on any number of Macs, no questions asked, and most importantly, no crappy "activation"."
There is a good reason for the difference between Apple and MS (in relation to how they control their respective OS): Apple makes OS X to run on their hardware ONLY. Therefore, if you are installing on ANY Mac, they have already made their money from the hardware. Remember, they are a hardware company.
MS, on the other hand, makes an OS that runs on ANY PC. They don't sell the hardware, so they try to make sure you have purchased the software. That's where they make their money.
You have to look at the reason why each company chooses to implement DRM or any other form of IP control.
OOOhhhh...I got a promotion!!! I used to be Lieutenant Conspicuous!!!
Thank you, my job is done here!
That may be true, but there is software that is used in critical applications everday.
The same people riding that airplane that was designed by a "professional engineer" are relying on software as well.
The safety and security of a structure or a piece of code is not contingent upon the credentials of an individual,
but how well the individual did his job in formulating his work and testing the results.
Software Engineers may not have an equivalent PE exam at this time, but there are organizations (ACM is one) trying to establish the
accountability among the community that the PE exam is supposed to provide.
Do not judge others based on a set of standards that do not even apply to them. I'm quite certain that civil and mechanical engineers do not send out their first set of blueprints as the finished product. I would gather that they test their design to ensure it meets the required standards. This is also the case for software engineers.
In addition, everything that is designed by civil and mechanical engineers do not require the same measures of safety. The same holds true with software. Some applications are more critical than others.
Just remember, there are morons in every profession.
Actually, the water would have no effect on the software.
The HARDWARE on the other hand would be toast.
This may have the same effect, but not the same causation.
Sorry, I couldn't help it considering how pointless this thread has gotten.
You can get all the non-sterile gauze you want for FREE!!!
Just go to the nearest hospital and look for the RED bins. There should be plenty!!! They also have free needles in case you need any of those.
"Most users get a new computer when the existing one will not easily do a new task."
:) ) I don't think wireless is enough of a reason to go out and buy a new system. There are generally multiple problems that arise which make it more economical to just buy a new PC because they are so much cheaper than Macs. In reality, consumers buy new systems for many reasons and whether they truly NEED a new PC or just WANT the latest and greatest hardware is a big factor as well.
That is the crux of the argument. Not counting the Adam computer I had in the early '80s, my first "real" PC was a Dell 266 MHz Pentium II that I purchased in 1997. Although I chose to make some upgrades to the system over time (CD burner and RAM), the Dell worked well for me for almost 6 years before I had to get a new computer. The only reason I was forced to buy a new one then was to run Visual Studio 2003 for my CS classes. The system is still functional for basic use (word and internet), although it is a bit sluggish.
My point is that the common man using a PC will not buy a new system until theirs dies or becomes too much of a hassle. They view them like cars. The more advanced users will perform upgrades to get the most out of the hardware they have already rather than start from scratch.
"Most users do not have the desire nor capability to install a wireless interface."
I think most users CAN plug a USB wireless adapter into their computer and run a setup disc. My ex-father-in-law is 76 and was able to do this. (Sorry for the ANECDOTE!
Lastly, older Macs go for more than PCs on ebay because they cost more than PCs when they are new as well. That doesn't necessarily make them better. I can purchase at least two PCs versus one Mac of comparable specs. Just because people are willing to pay for the included "I'm cool because I use a Mac" price mark-up, that does not translate to the Mac being more useful.
"Stop for a moment and let the deep, penetrating suckiness of those two lines seep into your being."
That is classic. Thank you for a much needed laugh.
Sorry, but macs are not "immune to viruses". Just because macs are not targeted like Windows, does not mean they are immune.
Just because a rattlesnake has not bitten my leg, that does not mean I am immune to their poison.
Obviously, I think Macs`are more secure than Windows boxes; however, that may be due more to the fact that they are not targeted like PCs. If there were as many Macs being used by corporations and households as there are PCs, we might find that Macs are not as secure as we think they are.
Remember, the Titanic was said to be unsinkable until it hit that iceburg. One day, Apple might hit an iceburg of their own.