Windows never gives me even one hurdle of an issue - most likely because I took the time to learn how to work with it, and given the fact that around 95% of desktop end-users also use Windows, I think you are an outlier.
Good luck with your ads that winblows is going to push.
Do you have any idea how rare it is to see an ad from Windows? Of course not - you hate Windows, and a friend told you a story about ads on Windows that confirmed your bias, so why question it - just repeat it.
Whatever ads you imagine "Winblows" pushes on you are dwarfed by the ads pushed on you when you take your browser - regardless of operating environment - to any social media website, any news site, etc.
Nearly an entire county changed their mind less than 24 hours after the November election.
Wrong.
First off, if we assume voting results were an accurate reflection of the mood of the country at the time of the election, Hillary's supporters didn't change their opinions after the election - they didn't like trump before the election, and they didn't like him after the election - no change.
Second, Trump's supporters liked Trum before the election, and they still like him after the election - no change.
Currently Trump is running about 40-45% popularity, slightly lower than his election results - so at best, maybe 10% of Americans changed their minds in the 15 months since the election.
"If 20,000 Pennsylvanians changed their votes we would have looked like geniuses" - John Podesta
You do realize that if the Trump administration gets everything it wants at NWS, they will STILL have a $1BN+ annual budget. He's not shuttering the agency, he's taking funding from $1.114BN to $1.024BN - oh, the horror!
How many forecasters does the NWS have currently working?
How many forecasters are needed to properly serve the public?
How many vacant forecaster positions are there at NWS right now?
With nearly five thousand staff positions and nearly 500 currently vacant positions, eliminating half the vacant positions isn't really so fucking moronic, is it?
Interesting to note your fiercely-held opinion is likely based on a complete lack of any facts on the subject.
It's not like any big things like emergency preparedness will be effected. In case the previous sentence did not come across properly, it was intended to be incredibly sarcastic. Weather forecasters help emergency management agencies and accurate forecasts are critical for helping to save lives and avert disasters.
Is the NWS currently providing adequate service?
How many forecasters are there currently?
How many unfilled forecaster positions are there in the NWS right now?
Hey dumbshit... You hear it because it is true. People are going homeless and hungry without more cuts. And no, it isn't because they are lazy and don't want to work. In fact the Dotard hates the immigrants who are willing to work 100 teams harder than he ever has the most.
100 teams?
the most?
If you are going to call someone a "dumbshit" you might want to double-check your response for you know, typos and brain-farts. Or not, it's your choice, dumbshit.
Buy a farmers almanac - they sell for a few dollars at your local Tractor Supply store, far less than the $1.1 Billion the NWS burns through each year.
The NWS has nearly 5,000 employees, the 248 cuts proposed in the budget document represent less than 5% of the current NWS staff level. With 122 forecasting office across the nation, that works out to two fewer forecasters per office, and the NWS is currently 10% under-staffed (10% of staff positions open/in-filled at present time).
Because it would take every single adult in USA paying $5 a year to make up the billion dollars it costs to run NWS
I think you're a bit off on the number of "adults" in America, but let's put that aside - that actual NWS budget stands at just over $1 Billion dollars, exactly who do you think is currently covering that $1 Billion dollar budget each year? Every working American, that's who.
After a year that saw over $300 million in damages from hurricanes, wildfires, and other natural disasters, the Trump administration is proposing significant cuts to the National Weather Service (NWS) and hopes to eliminate the jobs of 248 weather forecasters.
Is the administration (not Trump, Trump has nothing to do with staffing levels at NWS, get over your Trump Delusion Syndrome) eliminating unfilled positions or eliminating actual employees currently in those positions?
So we've had $300 MILLION in damages from hurricanes, wildfires, etc.? If that's the case, then why are spending BILLIONS to repair cities like Houston and the island territory of Puerto Rico to the tune of $125-150 Billion and $94 Billion respectively?
I'm curious, is the argument that there would be greater damages without our current number of forecasters, or is the argument that we'd have more hurricanes, tornadoes, flooding, etc. if not for the current staffing levels at NWS?
So "Trump" is proposing the elimination of, on average, 2 forecasters per office - that doesn't seem so bad - but how many are there in those 122 forecasting offices?
You may have noticed I put the name Trump in quotes - that's because only a fool would imagine that a sitting President has anything to do with actual staffing levels in an organization, but in today's hyper-political environment, many tend to refer to any action undertaken by anyone in an administration to be the responsibility of the sitting President - oddly, just a few years ago no one said things like "Obama illegally blocked tax-exempt applications by conservative groups" or "Obama illegally encouraged/facilitated running guns into Mexico in a program called "Fast n' Furious"" and so on - I wonder why that is?
I'm building up a small home lab based on Windows Server 2016 - it installs with less than 5 clicks, unless you want to use something other than an entire disk drive or a pre-existing partition.
Ubuntu asks the installer about LVM, GRUB, streaming updates during install, there's a couple screens about keyboard detection, the ability to add web servers or print servers, along with other functions, all as part of the process of installing. YES, you can ignorantly click next on each screen, but the point remains you still have a couple dozen times you need to click next.
To install Windows Server, the steps are:
Insert boot media Power on/restart computer Click 'next' to set country, keyboard, and local Click to agree terms of use agreement Select one of four options (std w/ or w/o desktop exp. or datacenter w/ or w/o desktop exp.) Pick drive/partition from menu (Install begins/completes) Enter new Administrator password after install completes
I run out of fingers counting the prompts I need to answer with Ubuntu.
You're at a party, you spy Elon Musk, and you walk up to him and ask 'What could you do if you could have the ISS for free?" When he asks you to confirm the price you say "Yes, for free - it's outlived it's useful life, and me and the folks at NASA were wondering what you would do with it, rather than our original plan to drive it into the Pacific Ocean in 18 months."
"Well, in that case I'd....."
I bet his answer wouldn't involve gouging the US taxpayer to grow plants in space as part of some contrived scientific experiment.
In this case it means monetizing what would otherwise turn into a brief flaming fireball in the sky.
Imagine what a company like SpaceX could do with it...
Remember when GM was going through bankruptcy? Rather than bailing out GM, imagine if a company like Tesla had bought one of GMs bigger plants at pennies on the dollar - I bet you'd see a lot more Tesla's on the road, a lot more charging stations in your neighborhood, and a bit less greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere - but no, instead the Democrats propped up GM and locked in those factories to keep producing cars that run on dinosaur juice and pollute the atmosphere.
Yeah, watch grandma work her way through an Ubuntu desktop install - it is harder than Windows 10 by a long shot.
You can likely make your case with two otherwise plain vanilla installs, one of Linux/Ubuntu, the other of Windows 10, and ask someone to perform a simple task - open a browser, write a letter, create a small spreadsheet. Linux may win, it may not - but on an actual install from CD-ROM, Windows wins hands-down.
Windows 8 (the sucky one, not the totally awesome Windows 8.1) has an equal market share to Linux Desktop users. Windows 8.1 has 4x the userbase, Windows 10 has 20x the userbase, and Windows 7 has about 30x the market share of Desktop Linux.
The unspoken truth in this article is that marketplace doesn't care about Linux, with it's 1.6% market share compared to Windows 88% market share and Mac's 8%.
A common experience at any restaurant with even a marginally successful drive-thru window - car customers get priority, because they block the pickup window until they get their order.
You forgot to add investing additional kitchen equipment, and increased investment in raw food, since both have to keep ample ingredients at each location.
Put simply, if your current restaurant is losing money, open a second restaurant! That was the previous poster's basic suggestion.
And why shouldn't restaurants be allowed to deliver drinks? It's not like two drinks delivered is going to cause alcohol problems
The profit isn't in just alcohol, it's in the $3 soda (with free refills!) that costs the restaurant owner a couple nickels that generates the most profit.
When people order-in, they tend to not order over-priced soft drinks with their food, when they dine-in, they do. A take-out order likely costs the average restaurant $2 in lost soft drink profit per entrée.
I would also like to see a takeout discount for not using up valuable dining space.
All that unused "valuable dining space" has no value if the restaurant isn't busy. If the restaurant is packed and your takeout meal ADDs to the revenue, we have something to talk about, but all the packaging, condiments, and delivery add to the cost, and likely far exceed your imagined "savings" from not occupying a table in the dining room, using reusable silverware/plates, etc. Lets not forget the college students that work as waitresses and waiters that need tip money you aren't giving them to help meet school expenses when you have take-out.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows 10 gives me hurdles of issues.
Windows never gives me even one hurdle of an issue - most likely because I took the time to learn how to work with it, and given the fact that around 95% of desktop end-users also use Windows, I think you are an outlier.
Good luck with your ads that winblows is going to push.
Do you have any idea how rare it is to see an ad from Windows? Of course not - you hate Windows, and a friend told you a story about ads on Windows that confirmed your bias, so why question it - just repeat it.
Whatever ads you imagine "Winblows" pushes on you are dwarfed by the ads pushed on you when you take your browser - regardless of operating environment - to any social media website, any news site, etc.
Nearly an entire county changed their mind less than 24 hours after the November election.
Wrong.
First off, if we assume voting results were an accurate reflection of the mood of the country at the time of the election, Hillary's supporters didn't change their opinions after the election - they didn't like trump before the election, and they didn't like him after the election - no change.
Second, Trump's supporters liked Trum before the election, and they still like him after the election - no change.
Currently Trump is running about 40-45% popularity, slightly lower than his election results - so at best, maybe 10% of Americans changed their minds in the 15 months since the election.
"If 20,000 Pennsylvanians changed their votes we would have looked like geniuses" - John Podesta
You do realize that if the Trump administration gets everything it wants at NWS, they will STILL have a $1BN+ annual budget. He's not shuttering the agency, he's taking funding from $1.114BN to $1.024BN - oh, the horror!
Getting rid of forecasters is fucking moronic.
Couple questions:
How many forecasters does the NWS have currently working?
How many forecasters are needed to properly serve the public?
How many vacant forecaster positions are there at NWS right now?
With nearly five thousand staff positions and nearly 500 currently vacant positions, eliminating half the vacant positions isn't really so fucking moronic , is it?
Interesting to note your fiercely-held opinion is likely based on a complete lack of any facts on the subject.
It's not like any big things like emergency preparedness will be effected. In case the previous sentence did not come across properly, it was intended to be incredibly sarcastic. Weather forecasters help emergency management agencies and accurate forecasts are critical for helping to save lives and avert disasters.
Is the NWS currently providing adequate service?
How many forecasters are there currently?
How many unfilled forecaster positions are there in the NWS right now?
Do more forecasters make Americans safer?
Will fewer forecasters make us less safe?
Hey dumbshit ... You hear it because it is true. People are going homeless and hungry without more cuts. And no, it isn't because they are lazy and don't want to work. In fact the Dotard hates the immigrants who are willing to work 100 teams harder than he ever has the most.
100 teams?
the most?
If you are going to call someone a "dumbshit" you might want to double-check your response for you know, typos and brain-farts. Or not, it's your choice, dumbshit.
Buy a farmers almanac - they sell for a few dollars at your local Tractor Supply store, far less than the $1.1 Billion the NWS burns through each year.
The NWS currently has 500 unfilled positions - eliminating 248 of those unfilled positions would be "painless" for most Americans.
The NWS has nearly 5,000 employees, the 248 cuts proposed in the budget document represent less than 5% of the current NWS staff level. With 122 forecasting office across the nation, that works out to two fewer forecasters per office, and the NWS is currently 10% under-staffed (10% of staff positions open/in-filled at present time).
Because it would take every single adult in USA paying $5 a year to make up the billion dollars it costs to run NWS
I think you're a bit off on the number of "adults" in America, but let's put that aside - that actual NWS budget stands at just over $1 Billion dollars, exactly who do you think is currently covering that $1 Billion dollar budget each year? Every working American, that's who.
After a year that saw over $300 million in damages from hurricanes, wildfires, and other natural disasters, the Trump administration is proposing significant cuts to the National Weather Service (NWS) and hopes to eliminate the jobs of 248 weather forecasters.
Is the administration (not Trump, Trump has nothing to do with staffing levels at NWS, get over your Trump Delusion Syndrome) eliminating unfilled positions or eliminating actual employees currently in those positions?
So we've had $300 MILLION in damages from hurricanes, wildfires, etc.? If that's the case, then why are spending BILLIONS to repair cities like Houston and the island territory of Puerto Rico to the tune of $125-150 Billion and $94 Billion respectively?
I'm curious, is the argument that there would be greater damages without our current number of forecasters, or is the argument that we'd have more hurricanes, tornadoes, flooding, etc. if not for the current staffing levels at NWS?
If "Trump" is proposing eliminating 248 NWS Forecasters, exactly how many are there currently?
Apparently there are 122 NWS forecasting offices
So "Trump" is proposing the elimination of, on average, 2 forecasters per office - that doesn't seem so bad - but how many are there in those 122 forecasting offices?
It seems the NWS may already have over 248 "vacancies" currently in it's organization, so this may be nothing more than "Trump" adopting current staffing levels, rather than actually cutting people from eliminating positions.
For what it's worth, it seems the NWS has nearly five thousand employees, cutting 248 forecasters represents a 5% cut in staffing.
You may have noticed I put the name Trump in quotes - that's because only a fool would imagine that a sitting President has anything to do with actual staffing levels in an organization, but in today's hyper-political environment, many tend to refer to any action undertaken by anyone in an administration to be the responsibility of the sitting President - oddly, just a few years ago no one said things like "Obama illegally blocked tax-exempt applications by conservative groups" or "Obama illegally encouraged/facilitated running guns into Mexico in a program called "Fast n' Furious"" and so on - I wonder why that is?
I'm building up a small home lab based on Windows Server 2016 - it installs with less than 5 clicks, unless you want to use something other than an entire disk drive or a pre-existing partition.
Ubuntu asks the installer about LVM, GRUB, streaming updates during install, there's a couple screens about keyboard detection, the ability to add web servers or print servers, along with other functions, all as part of the process of installing. YES, you can ignorantly click next on each screen, but the point remains you still have a couple dozen times you need to click next.
To install Windows Server, the steps are:
Insert boot media
Power on/restart computer
Click 'next' to set country, keyboard, and local
Click to agree terms of use agreement
Select one of four options (std w/ or w/o desktop exp. or datacenter w/ or w/o desktop exp.)
Pick drive/partition from menu
(Install begins/completes)
Enter new Administrator password after install completes
I run out of fingers counting the prompts I need to answer with Ubuntu.
You're at a party, you spy Elon Musk, and you walk up to him and ask 'What could you do if you could have the ISS for free?" When he asks you to confirm the price you say "Yes, for free - it's outlived it's useful life, and me and the folks at NASA were wondering what you would do with it, rather than our original plan to drive it into the Pacific Ocean in 18 months."
"Well, in that case I'd....."
I bet his answer wouldn't involve gouging the US taxpayer to grow plants in space as part of some contrived scientific experiment.
In this case it means monetizing what would otherwise turn into a brief flaming fireball in the sky.
Imagine what a company like SpaceX could do with it...
Remember when GM was going through bankruptcy? Rather than bailing out GM, imagine if a company like Tesla had bought one of GMs bigger plants at pennies on the dollar - I bet you'd see a lot more Tesla's on the road, a lot more charging stations in your neighborhood, and a bit less greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere - but no, instead the Democrats propped up GM and locked in those factories to keep producing cars that run on dinosaur juice and pollute the atmosphere.
Strip Trump's name from story and it would be celebrated as a great move.
The headline should be Gov't looks to hand off ISS to private firm to keep a presence in space AND save gov't money.
Would you all really be that upset if Obama had proposed selling the ISS to Elon Musk's SpaceX rather than de-orbiting it and destroying it?
Yeah, watch grandma work her way through an Ubuntu desktop install - it is harder than Windows 10 by a long shot.
You can likely make your case with two otherwise plain vanilla installs, one of Linux/Ubuntu, the other of Windows 10, and ask someone to perform a simple task - open a browser, write a letter, create a small spreadsheet. Linux may win, it may not - but on an actual install from CD-ROM, Windows wins hands-down.
Windows 8 (the sucky one, not the totally awesome Windows 8.1) has an equal market share to Linux Desktop users. Windows 8.1 has 4x the userbase, Windows 10 has 20x the userbase, and Windows 7 has about 30x the market share of Desktop Linux.
The unspoken truth in this article is that marketplace doesn't care about Linux, with it's 1.6% market share compared to Windows 88% market share and Mac's 8%.
Source
The McDonald's by me delivers through uber eats
And McDonald's, being a smart, well-run corporation, doesn't pay for the delivery - the customer does.
A common experience at any restaurant with even a marginally successful drive-thru window - car customers get priority, because they block the pickup window until they get their order.
You forgot to add investing additional kitchen equipment, and increased investment in raw food, since both have to keep ample ingredients at each location.
Put simply, if your current restaurant is losing money, open a second restaurant! That was the previous poster's basic suggestion.
The concierge already has all that information. These middle men offer zero value.
wow, a hotel with a concierge, how mainstream.
And why shouldn't restaurants be allowed to deliver drinks?
It's not like two drinks delivered is going to cause alcohol problems
The profit isn't in just alcohol, it's in the $3 soda (with free refills!) that costs the restaurant owner a couple nickels that generates the most profit.
When people order-in, they tend to not order over-priced soft drinks with their food, when they dine-in, they do. A take-out order likely costs the average restaurant $2 in lost soft drink profit per entrée.
I would also like to see a takeout discount for not using up valuable dining space.
All that unused "valuable dining space" has no value if the restaurant isn't busy. If the restaurant is packed and your takeout meal ADDs to the revenue, we have something to talk about, but all the packaging, condiments, and delivery add to the cost, and likely far exceed your imagined "savings" from not occupying a table in the dining room, using reusable silverware/plates, etc. Lets not forget the college students that work as waitresses and waiters that need tip money you aren't giving them to help meet school expenses when you have take-out.