I'd say this is a reasonable comment. I am actually reading this on a surface RT. Regarding marketing, I'd say MS missed the boat. They tried to make it look hip, but instead looked a little "me too-ish". One particularly good selling point is that my settings, features and apps now follow my login everywhere if I'd like it that way. What about the fact that there's almost zero malware for the RT platform? What about how much better security is handled for metro apps? And yes price killed it too. All said and done, I paid over $700 for mine with a keyboard touch cover. That really is a lot of dough.
Also, with Surface Pro, it has a built-in digitizer. Why don't they tout how useful that would be for artists? Adobe stuff is available to that platform, and the resolution is great.
All that said though, I don't actually regret the decision. The platform continues to improve and I love being able to read my kindle books, and take notes on Onenote. Its probably the most well built device I've ever owned, and that's saying a lot since I also have an Apple MBP./. MS hate is almost obligatory. It cracks me up because people think they're being witty when in reality it's actually easier to intuit negativity than to do the hard work of building something yourself. Your comments are pretty fair and well stated though.
I'd say this is a reasonable comment. I am actually reading this on a surface RT. Regarding marketing, I'd say MS missed the boat. They tried to make it look hip, but instead looked a little "me too-ish". One particularly good selling point is that my settings, features and apps now follow my login everywhere if I'd like that? What about the fact that there's almost zero malware for the RT platform? What about how much better security is handled for metro apps?
And yes price killed it too. All said and done, I paid over $700 for mine with a keyboard touch cover. That really is a lot of dough.
Also, with Surface Pro, it has a built-in digitizer. Why don't they tout how useful that would be for artists? Adobe stuff is available to that platform, and the resolution is great.
All that said though, I don't actually regret the decision. The platform continues to improve. I love being able to read my kindle books, and take notes on Onenote./. MS hate is almost obligatory. It cracks me up because people think they're being witty when in reality it's actually easier to intuit negativity than to do the hard work of building something yourself. Your comments are pretty fair and well stated though.
No I didn't RTFA, sorry, but the premise described in the description is the dumbest line of thinking ever. It's been debunked time and time again. If it's only fair to include the infrastructure involved in charging the car, you also have to include the infrastructure involved in fueling petroleum based vehicles too. Once you do that, it's truly a fair comparison, and the original argument falls apart pretty quickly.
This is an atrocity! First they silence the CPU fans, then what? What about their civil rights? These people have a right to be excited about their CPUs dangit! I condemn these acts.
It's partly marketshare as others above me have commented, but also mindshare. MS is getting long in the tooth. It isn't associated with the younger kids as a cool new thing anymore. It's old, and it's loosing its relevance with each passing year by no other force than simply the progression of time. Think back to when you were a kid. Didn't you identify with the newer more evolved anything? Why? Because you thought it was more like you, younger, more evolved. MS knows it's loosing mindshare every day. Despite it's name being on everything, people have grown tired of it.
At this point I'm pretty sure no one is reading this, but a while back, I was worried about the exact same thing you were, that when you die there is just nothingness, and it scared me silly. Later I read a list of studies of patients who had NDEs. With each one the argument of: yeah, but their experiences could all be made up in the mind somehow after death. I could not shake that argument. Then I came upon the extraordinary case of a lady who described the whole shebang . . . Floating above the bed, describing stuff in the hospital in detail, later being reuinited with previously dead family members, beautiful light etc, etc. The subject described this in great detail, yet they were born blind. SOMEONE please explain that one away. Add also to that her description of the sensation of being able to see as being unnerving and disconcerting at first. I thought well still her brain could have SOMEHOW made that stuff up. It's a BIG stretch, but I bet it's possible, and then I read that the doctors corroborated all of her observations post-death. It was physically impossible for her to detect these things before death, let alone after. I have yet to have this one explained away.
Ah well, I probably deserved that for labeling naysayers as film prudes . . . my bad.
All I know is that each time I've seen it, I've stood in line with people worried that their precious transformers childhood would be destroyed by Mr. Bay and Co, so they had a pretty guarded mindset from the beginning. Me too actually to a degree. Not a single one of those people were inspired to utter the same level venom I've seen from you and a few others. In fact everyone I've talked to were pretty impressed, transformer fans or not. I went with someone who doesn't even like movies and even that person liked it. So, since I started it with my naysayers quip, allow me to hypocritically announce: let the insinuations that only "idiots" can like this film begin . . .
Meh, typical holy-er than thou comments. Haven't y'all figured out that the only movies you'll like will be from Hitchcock, or Kirasau (or however it's spelled)? Perhaps you should just stick to watching that stuff, and leave the rest of us to enjoy life. Seriously people it's a summer blockbuster. What'd you think it would be some oscar calibre film?
Anyway, here's some observations:
I thought that the dialogue was really cheesy, but it was well masked by humor. Some scenes were seriously hillarious, but others were funny enough to offset the akwardness of delivering lines about decepticons, autobots, and some struggle for the All Spark. It wasn't great, but it could have been FAR worse.
I thought that most moments between the boy and the girl were too mushy, but they handled that again by introducing humor. And for cripes sake, thank you for not allowing them to engage in some kiss during the heat of the battle in the city scene. I wouldn't have put it in at all personally, but it worked best at the very end. I thought that the acting could have been better in some places, but for the most part it did it's job.
The whole 20 minute scene with them looking for the glasses could have been clipped a bit, but they had to keep the mom's reaction in there. To keep that there, they needed to provide at least some time for the boy to dig himself deeper and deeper into that hole. The crowd errupted in that scene, and it had to stay.
Bay/Spielberg honored the older fans by paying hamage to the old movie and series. While much has changed, the look and feel remains much the same. And to see Barricade running then instantly transform down into the car was unbelieveable.
The problem I see with this movie is that it isn't very re-watchable. I saw it twice, and loved it more the first time than the second. That's my only gripe though . . . I was expecting at most that I'd see a ton of robot action. I wasn't expecting them to do anything to hide any flaws. I wasn't expecting them to offer nods to the older fans, and I wasn't expecting any character development. Although I didn't get oscar calibre versions of the stuff above, I walked away with MUCH more than I thought I would. The visuals themselves (and I'm not talking about only Fox either) were unbelieveable.
Not much to say about most of what you just said, and I don't know where you get your obesity facts for AU, but I've been to MOST of that continent before, and I can tell you that they do not have an obesity problem. Sorry to nit-pick, but whatever studies there are regarding the issue are obviously skewed. Thinking back, I don't remember seeing a single overweight person there. Not a one, and we went to some of the most populous areas in the country. I think you should check your facts dude.
I've heard this argument many times, but it simply doesn't wash. Internal combustion motors have an efficiency of 25%ish, which basically means that 75% gets wasted in heat, friction etc. The battery/electric motor design is much more efficient, to the tune of 90%, and that was for some of the older technology. Therefore we'd have far LESS pollution, because a greater percentage of energy would be put into the movement of the vehicle.
This says nothing about the fuel wasted getting fuel from one place to the other. So now you have all the pollution from cars, and all the pollution from tanker trucks that bring cars their gas to add into the mix. But then there's oil rigs, there's the large oil tankers that of course never run aground, and never ever spill . . . So we have all of this polluting infrastructure that delivers fuel to an engine that gets 25% efficiencies at best, but we're worried about any batteries causing more pollution? In light of all of this, that seems a bit silly don't you think?
I won't even get into coal pollution recapturing devices which are beginning to make a dent in the problem ...
Beyond all of this though, it's possible to power an entire house with solar shingles. You can literally take your house off the grid in most areas of the world with solar cells on your roof. You can't tell me that solar-cells wouldn't become more popular if electric vehicles did too. This would MORE than offset any demands placed on our "grid" as a result of battery technology.
Seriously, GM actually has the right idea with this one. Forget hydrogen, forget the idiocy that is ethanol, and lets use something we have here, now, today that works, and works WELL.
This Paul Manger dude doesn't know what he's talking about. Dolphins have the approximate intelligence of your average 3-5 year-old. Most of their neurons are dedicated to process their sonar. Moreoever, I know from first-hand experience, these animals have personalities, and relationships with their handlers, and other dolphins. All of these functions come from higher-order places in the brain, and BTW, Dolphins aren't just for jumping through hoops.
This is precisely the point I was going to post, but glad I didn't due to the fact that you did. Assuming that the phone is hand's free, and you don't have to mess with it at all (re: voice activation) there is zero difference between it and talking to someone next to you, and you can't ban passengers in a car.
Lets take that a step further, and consider the soccer-mom with three kids, of various ages between 7 months, and 4 years of age. You can't tell me that she isn't more distracted while driving than many people with Cell-phones. Yet cell-phones get the bad rap. I think if used responsibly there is nothing wrong with using one, and for farting out loud, why don't more people do what I do and simply pull over to the shoulder to cary on conversations, or dial a number?
Cell phones don't kill people . . . people kill people.
-Schnib
It is imporant to get the basics, and most of the basics can be taken care of by IT. If done properly won't impact the user at all. "What about passwords?" you might ask. The most insecure thing at most companies will always be the user. The best thing to do is be sure that no normal user has access to everything; every record, every file, every database . . . This will limit a lot of damage. I tend to believe user education is a waste of time too. It isn't a user's job to worry about this stuff, and the fact that we have poorly designed OS's isn't their fault. Other than these issues, most security-related issues can be taken care of behind the scenes.
BTW not sure why your company is mandating manual patching versus implementing Windoz Update Services (WUS). Computers patch and reboot VERY early in the morning, and the user doesn't have any choice in the matter. I have never had problems with this procedure BTW.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say this is a reasonable comment. I am actually reading this on a surface RT. Regarding marketing, I'd say MS missed the boat. They tried to make it look hip, but instead looked a little "me too-ish". One particularly good selling point is that my settings, features and apps now follow my login everywhere if I'd like it that way. What about the fact that there's almost zero malware for the RT platform? What about how much better security is handled for metro apps?
And yes price killed it too. All said and done, I paid over $700 for mine with a keyboard touch cover. That really is a lot of dough.
Also, with Surface Pro, it has a built-in digitizer. Why don't they tout how useful that would be for artists? Adobe stuff is available to that platform, and the resolution is great.
All that said though, I don't actually regret the decision. The platform continues to improve and I love being able to read my kindle books, and take notes on Onenote. Its probably the most well built device I've ever owned, and that's saying a lot since I also have an Apple MBP. /. MS hate is almost obligatory. It cracks me up because people think they're being witty when in reality it's actually easier to intuit negativity than to do the hard work of building something yourself. Your comments are pretty fair and well stated though.
I'd say this is a reasonable comment. I am actually reading this on a surface RT. Regarding marketing, I'd say MS missed the boat. They tried to make it look hip, but instead looked a little "me too-ish". One particularly good selling point is that my settings, features and apps now follow my login everywhere if I'd like that? What about the fact that there's almost zero malware for the RT platform? What about how much better security is handled for metro apps? And yes price killed it too. All said and done, I paid over $700 for mine with a keyboard touch cover. That really is a lot of dough. Also, with Surface Pro, it has a built-in digitizer. Why don't they tout how useful that would be for artists? Adobe stuff is available to that platform, and the resolution is great. All that said though, I don't actually regret the decision. The platform continues to improve. I love being able to read my kindle books, and take notes on Onenote. /. MS hate is almost obligatory. It cracks me up because people think they're being witty when in reality it's actually easier to intuit negativity than to do the hard work of building something yourself. Your comments are pretty fair and well stated though.
Good turn off the internet connection on your phone then. -S
Office 360 is an unmitigated success according to recent reports. Google that. What Xbox losses? Just more FUD from the uninformed.
No I didn't RTFA, sorry, but the premise described in the description is the dumbest line of thinking ever. It's been debunked time and time again. If it's only fair to include the infrastructure involved in charging the car, you also have to include the infrastructure involved in fueling petroleum based vehicles too. Once you do that, it's truly a fair comparison, and the original argument falls apart pretty quickly.
This is an atrocity! First they silence the CPU fans, then what? What about their civil rights? These people have a right to be excited about their CPUs dangit! I condemn these acts.
It's partly marketshare as others above me have commented, but also mindshare. MS is getting long in the tooth. It isn't associated with the younger kids as a cool new thing anymore. It's old, and it's loosing its relevance with each passing year by no other force than simply the progression of time. Think back to when you were a kid. Didn't you identify with the newer more evolved anything? Why? Because you thought it was more like you, younger, more evolved. MS knows it's loosing mindshare every day. Despite it's name being on everything, people have grown tired of it.
At this point I'm pretty sure no one is reading this, but a while back, I was worried about the exact same thing you were, that when you die there is just nothingness, and it scared me silly. Later I read a list of studies of patients who had NDEs. With each one the argument of: yeah, but their experiences could all be made up in the mind somehow after death. I could not shake that argument. Then I came upon the extraordinary case of a lady who described the whole shebang . . . Floating above the bed, describing stuff in the hospital in detail, later being reuinited with previously dead family members, beautiful light etc, etc. The subject described this in great detail, yet they were born blind. SOMEONE please explain that one away. Add also to that her description of the sensation of being able to see as being unnerving and disconcerting at first. I thought well still her brain could have SOMEHOW made that stuff up. It's a BIG stretch, but I bet it's possible, and then I read that the doctors corroborated all of her observations post-death. It was physically impossible for her to detect these things before death, let alone after. I have yet to have this one explained away.
Ah well, I probably deserved that for labeling naysayers as film prudes . . . my bad. All I know is that each time I've seen it, I've stood in line with people worried that their precious transformers childhood would be destroyed by Mr. Bay and Co, so they had a pretty guarded mindset from the beginning. Me too actually to a degree. Not a single one of those people were inspired to utter the same level venom I've seen from you and a few others. In fact everyone I've talked to were pretty impressed, transformer fans or not. I went with someone who doesn't even like movies and even that person liked it. So, since I started it with my naysayers quip, allow me to hypocritically announce: let the insinuations that only "idiots" can like this film begin . . .
Meh, typical holy-er than thou comments. Haven't y'all figured out that the only movies you'll like will be from Hitchcock, or Kirasau (or however it's spelled)? Perhaps you should just stick to watching that stuff, and leave the rest of us to enjoy life. Seriously people it's a summer blockbuster. What'd you think it would be some oscar calibre film? Anyway, here's some observations: I thought that the dialogue was really cheesy, but it was well masked by humor. Some scenes were seriously hillarious, but others were funny enough to offset the akwardness of delivering lines about decepticons, autobots, and some struggle for the All Spark. It wasn't great, but it could have been FAR worse. I thought that most moments between the boy and the girl were too mushy, but they handled that again by introducing humor. And for cripes sake, thank you for not allowing them to engage in some kiss during the heat of the battle in the city scene. I wouldn't have put it in at all personally, but it worked best at the very end. I thought that the acting could have been better in some places, but for the most part it did it's job. The whole 20 minute scene with them looking for the glasses could have been clipped a bit, but they had to keep the mom's reaction in there. To keep that there, they needed to provide at least some time for the boy to dig himself deeper and deeper into that hole. The crowd errupted in that scene, and it had to stay. Bay/Spielberg honored the older fans by paying hamage to the old movie and series. While much has changed, the look and feel remains much the same. And to see Barricade running then instantly transform down into the car was unbelieveable. The problem I see with this movie is that it isn't very re-watchable. I saw it twice, and loved it more the first time than the second. That's my only gripe though . . . I was expecting at most that I'd see a ton of robot action. I wasn't expecting them to do anything to hide any flaws. I wasn't expecting them to offer nods to the older fans, and I wasn't expecting any character development. Although I didn't get oscar calibre versions of the stuff above, I walked away with MUCH more than I thought I would. The visuals themselves (and I'm not talking about only Fox either) were unbelieveable.
Not much to say about most of what you just said, and I don't know where you get your obesity facts for AU, but I've been to MOST of that continent before, and I can tell you that they do not have an obesity problem. Sorry to nit-pick, but whatever studies there are regarding the issue are obviously skewed. Thinking back, I don't remember seeing a single overweight person there. Not a one, and we went to some of the most populous areas in the country. I think you should check your facts dude.
I've heard this argument many times, but it simply doesn't wash. Internal combustion motors have an efficiency of 25%ish, which basically means that 75% gets wasted in heat, friction etc. The battery/electric motor design is much more efficient, to the tune of 90%, and that was for some of the older technology. Therefore we'd have far LESS pollution, because a greater percentage of energy would be put into the movement of the vehicle.
..
This says nothing about the fuel wasted getting fuel from one place to the other. So now you have all the pollution from cars, and all the pollution from tanker trucks that bring cars their gas to add into the mix. But then there's oil rigs, there's the large oil tankers that of course never run aground, and never ever spill . . . So we have all of this polluting infrastructure that delivers fuel to an engine that gets 25% efficiencies at best, but we're worried about any batteries causing more pollution? In light of all of this, that seems a bit silly don't you think?
I won't even get into coal pollution recapturing devices which are beginning to make a dent in the problem .
Beyond all of this though, it's possible to power an entire house with solar shingles. You can literally take your house off the grid in most areas of the world with solar cells on your roof. You can't tell me that solar-cells wouldn't become more popular if electric vehicles did too. This would MORE than offset any demands placed on our "grid" as a result of battery technology.
Seriously, GM actually has the right idea with this one. Forget hydrogen, forget the idiocy that is ethanol, and lets use something we have here, now, today that works, and works WELL.
This Paul Manger dude doesn't know what he's talking about. Dolphins have the approximate intelligence of your average 3-5 year-old. Most of their neurons are dedicated to process their sonar. Moreoever, I know from first-hand experience, these animals have personalities, and relationships with their handlers, and other dolphins. All of these functions come from higher-order places in the brain, and BTW, Dolphins aren't just for jumping through hoops.
This is precisely the point I was going to post, but glad I didn't due to the fact that you did. Assuming that the phone is hand's free, and you don't have to mess with it at all (re: voice activation) there is zero difference between it and talking to someone next to you, and you can't ban passengers in a car. Lets take that a step further, and consider the soccer-mom with three kids, of various ages between 7 months, and 4 years of age. You can't tell me that she isn't more distracted while driving than many people with Cell-phones. Yet cell-phones get the bad rap. I think if used responsibly there is nothing wrong with using one, and for farting out loud, why don't more people do what I do and simply pull over to the shoulder to cary on conversations, or dial a number? Cell phones don't kill people . . . people kill people. -Schnib
Here's a link discussing what Australia found. I tried to find a news article, but couldn't immediately
d s.htm
http://www.mercola.com/2000/nov/5/victory_over_si
It is imporant to get the basics, and most of the basics can be taken care of by IT. If done properly won't impact the user at all. "What about passwords?" you might ask. The most insecure thing at most companies will always be the user. The best thing to do is be sure that no normal user has access to everything; every record, every file, every database . . . This will limit a lot of damage. I tend to believe user education is a waste of time too. It isn't a user's job to worry about this stuff, and the fact that we have poorly designed OS's isn't their fault. Other than these issues, most security-related issues can be taken care of behind the scenes.
BTW not sure why your company is mandating manual patching versus implementing Windoz Update Services (WUS). Computers patch and reboot VERY early in the morning, and the user doesn't have any choice in the matter. I have never had problems with this procedure BTW.
-Schnibitz