I agree fully - but just think, what happens to the sites that *don't* do this? What about the ones that *don't* use blinky ads, pop-ups/pop-unders, and all that?
AdBlock blocks all ads by default, so even the people who don't do the annoying ads and shady adware schemes get punished.
I'm not saying that I blame anyone for using AdBlock - I'm just saying that not everyone trying to make money off of ads is contributing to that mess.
If you are a business (which you most likely are if you're even considering "cloud storage") then you're probably going to pay for a provider that doesn't have these quotas - either that or you'll figure that a safe data backup is worth the cost.
Your assumption is wrong. There are FSF-endorsed projects which play Flash/Shockwave content. It'll be able to play Youtube videos through that. Plus, if worse comes to worst, you can just download the plugin from Adobe.
I can understand not switching for the lack of wifi support. . . but on a desktop, you don't need wireless, and do you really care about not having "3D capability in X" on your desktop? I sure don't. X really isn't used for 3D unless you're using Compiz (which most people aren't).
So you'll have to go download the driver from nVidia. . . big deal. There's already a project underway for open-source 3D-accelerated nVidia drivers, and the ATi drivers are open-source already.
Great, another movie based on a video game - hopefully it won't suck this time. I kinda hope they bring back System Shock - I'd like to see a new sequel in that series. Not as a movie though.
The real question is, who cares if things are as easy as they could be? Also, who finds them to be difficult?
For example, I use Linux all the time. To me, easy software installation means typing "apt-get install". It's a lot easier than searching the entire Internet for one stupid little piece of software, double clicking it, clicking "Next", etc.
Also, there really are a lot of things that open-source programmers can't control at all - for example hardware interfaces or hardware design. Sure, it's possible to get a WinModem to work on Linux but it means you have to do some reverse engineering. Most people don't want to spend all their time figuring out how to get a WinModem or graphics card to work with Linux -- especially when it's not their job. You can't blame them.
As far as all the different programs go. . . saying that projects trying to accomplish the same thing is counterproductive isn't true - these programs do have their differences. Ten different mail server programs may have different features or strengths. Maybe one is easy to set up, one is more advanced with more features, one is less resource intensive, one hogs more resources but is faster, etc.
Right. But I'm sure any other grammar Nazis could've looked it up for themselves rather than have to read it from an AC.
Good for him using refutable sources, but he really didn't need to take all that time out just to show that "unsolicitedly" isn't a word. We've got the Internet, we can look it up too.
"there are actually very few people who want anything to do everything."
It isn't that so much as it is that usually these multifunctional devices are lacking in some way. Practicality is also an issue - so what if I can watch movies on my Zune, I'd rather watch it on a 27" screen than have to stare at a 5" screen and look like an idiot staring at my hand.
If the Zune can perform all its functions well, then it might stand a chance. I wouldn't bet on it, but it might.
Don't forget the craptastic sound you have to make to pronounce its name. . .
Seriously. "Zune". . . someone at MS wasn't thinking when they it that.
(Not that I'm surprised or anything, MS just has craptastic stuff I guess, like their bot that indexed my site 46 times in about half an hour yesterday. Good thing it's running Linux.)
I'd rather have Twilight Zone back.
Dr. Who might be the longest running but it's definitely not the best. I only saw one episode, but. . . well there's a reason why I only saw one.
Well it sounds like they'd actually sew you, not your pants. That needle might hurt a little bit. . . and I'd rather go to a professional for stitches. . .
He was an employee but he was probably bored at work one day and put that in there, the other guys thought it was pretty cool but didn't want the boss to see it so they disabled it so no one would know (unless they hacked it, which is what they had to do to enable Hot Coffee).
No, it's the fact that the people who legislate the games aren't the ones who play them.
They also don't realize that "Hot Coffee" wasn't made by Rockstar Games, "GTA" was. "Hot Coffee" was something some bored programmer threw in there as an Easter egg for his own enjoyment.
Because they're two different children with different experiences and separate minds. Maybe one gets more attention than the other, maybe one wants a lot of attention. . . We can blame the child but it would be useless because until a certain age, he doesn't know better and has no idea of the consequence of his actions. And once he's past that point he's already got his own personality and way of thinking, and his own set of experiences that are beyond his control which are affecting the courses of action he takes.
First of all, they didn't have video games back in the '40s.
Second of all. . . Columbine involved shooting unarmed children. In fact, Columbine was shooting unarmed children. That's all that happened - two kids with low self-esteem went to school pissed off about how poorly their classmates treated them and killed a bunch of people. That's pretty much all there was to it. You can't turn it any other way - killing kids wasn't just something that happened behind-the-scenes that they didn't want you to know about like in WWII with killing the Jews.
Which is precisely why this game was made. Killing kids isn't normal. You're fucked up if you just one day decide to go kill a bunch of kids and then go kill yourself.
But people won't talk about it. According to them, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were just bad kids, and that's that. They don't want to think about what happened to these kids that made them do this, and therefore they aren't thinking of real, effective ways to prevent it from happening in the future (yeah, they outlawed guns and knives in schools, big deal - it doesn't take a gun or knife to kill someone). A better way would be to figure out what made these kids want to do this, and fix that. I guarantee you that these kids would've done something similar even if they couldn't have gotten weapons into school. I don't know exactly what, maybe they'd've kicked the shit out of people or something, but they would've done something bad nonetheless.
And there are "WWII extermination camp simulator" style games:
"KZ Manager"
IIRC I remember seeing a couple screenshots of a concentration camp administrator game in an Amiga magazine once, years ago. It was supposedly made by some German nazi wannabe teens.
Some new companies will consist of people who worked for the old companies. Like you said, "they will take their Windows-specific knowledge with them, and will likely prefer to use that existing knowledge rather than try to learn a new environment."
Other companies will be made of all new people and they'll try Linux.
And actually, just about any startup would probably be looking at open-source simply because they haven't hit the big-time yet and don't have a lot of money to use MS products.
I KNOWS HOW TO CLICK STUFF ON THE INTERWEBS TUBES
Which brings me to the question. . . why was the entire contents of the link restated in the summary?
If I want to read it, I'll click the link.
He can already crack WEP in under five minutes, I could see where he could possibly crack WEP in a single "for" loop or something using recursion (in which case why would it need to loop? Maybe if something goes wrong, the router doesn't respond or something).
And then SHA1 and RSA encryption would be his next target, and eventually he'd get it to where he can crack that in a single "for" loop.
"iMacs and iBooks shipped with AppleWorks for a long time and people still bought office. Granted, AppleWorks isn't very good by today's standards."
Yes, but people at least tried AppleWorks and found that they didn't like it. If they had found that they liked it as well as (or better than) Office they wouldn't have bought Office. Nothing's wrong with that - they gave AppleWorks a try and found that they preferred Office.
"A typical home user trying to use linux would pay money. They will buy a distro at the local store which often charges for their update service and technical support as part of the price. Most of them are not tech savvy enough to pick another distro with free packages or compile software."
Yes, most people do pay for Linux. And $69 for OSX is reasonable (never used it myself but it certainly looks cool - and I've only heard good things about it).
For most people it's not only about price, it's a balance between price and worth. Is Linux worth the $50 (or whatever) you pay at the store? Is it worth the free CD Ubuntu sends you in the mail? Is OSX worth $69? IMO, yes.
But is XP Pro -- which costs $100 to $150 more, and has all the same features (even less, in some cases) -- really worth buying? Is Office 2003 Basic Edition worth $190 -- especially when WordPerfect Office X3 Home costs about half that price, and OpenOffice is free? IMO, no.
Good products are worth paying for. Overpriced products are, well, overpriced - and most people won't buy them if they know of a good, compatible alternative. And it seems to me that MS products (well, Windows and Office, anyway) tend to be overpriced.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree fully - but just think, what happens to the sites that *don't* do this? What about the ones that *don't* use blinky ads, pop-ups/pop-unders, and all that? AdBlock blocks all ads by default, so even the people who don't do the annoying ads and shady adware schemes get punished. I'm not saying that I blame anyone for using AdBlock - I'm just saying that not everyone trying to make money off of ads is contributing to that mess.
I'd doubt it. AdBlock Plus is well-known and used enough that it'll get picked up.
If you are a business (which you most likely are if you're even considering "cloud storage") then you're probably going to pay for a provider that doesn't have these quotas - either that or you'll figure that a safe data backup is worth the cost.
Your assumption is wrong. There are FSF-endorsed projects which play Flash/Shockwave content. It'll be able to play Youtube videos through that. Plus, if worse comes to worst, you can just download the plugin from Adobe.
I can understand not switching for the lack of wifi support. . . but on a desktop, you don't need wireless, and do you really care about not having "3D capability in X" on your desktop? I sure don't. X really isn't used for 3D unless you're using Compiz (which most people aren't). So you'll have to go download the driver from nVidia. . . big deal. There's already a project underway for open-source 3D-accelerated nVidia drivers, and the ATi drivers are open-source already.
Great, another movie based on a video game - hopefully it won't suck this time.
I kinda hope they bring back System Shock - I'd like to see a new sequel in that series. Not as a movie though.
For example, I use Linux all the time. To me, easy software installation means typing "apt-get install". It's a lot easier than searching the entire Internet for one stupid little piece of software, double clicking it, clicking "Next", etc.
Also, there really are a lot of things that open-source programmers can't control at all - for example hardware interfaces or hardware design. Sure, it's possible to get a WinModem to work on Linux but it means you have to do some reverse engineering. Most people don't want to spend all their time figuring out how to get a WinModem or graphics card to work with Linux -- especially when it's not their job. You can't blame them.
As far as all the different programs go. . . saying that projects trying to accomplish the same thing is counterproductive isn't true - these programs do have their differences. Ten different mail server programs may have different features or strengths. Maybe one is easy to set up, one is more advanced with more features, one is less resource intensive, one hogs more resources but is faster, etc.
Good for him using refutable sources, but he really didn't need to take all that time out just to show that "unsolicitedly" isn't a word. We've got the Internet, we can look it up too.
From the website, though, it looks like they tried to throw a bunch of big names in there rather than try to make a good show.
Ah but have you ever seen a shit brown Pocket PC? I think not!
It isn't that so much as it is that usually these multifunctional devices are lacking in some way. Practicality is also an issue - so what if I can watch movies on my Zune, I'd rather watch it on a 27" screen than have to stare at a 5" screen and look like an idiot staring at my hand.
If the Zune can perform all its functions well, then it might stand a chance. I wouldn't bet on it, but it might.
Seriously. "Zune". . . someone at MS wasn't thinking when they it that.
(Not that I'm surprised or anything, MS just has craptastic stuff I guess, like their bot that indexed my site 46 times in about half an hour yesterday. Good thing it's running Linux.)
I'd rather have Twilight Zone back. Dr. Who might be the longest running but it's definitely not the best. I only saw one episode, but. . . well there's a reason why I only saw one.
Well it sounds like they'd actually sew you, not your pants. That needle might hurt a little bit. . . and I'd rather go to a professional for stitches. . .
Well that's pretty cool, I bet you're the only one that knows how to use the Internet and look up "unsolicitedly".
He was an employee but he was probably bored at work one day and put that in there, the other guys thought it was pretty cool but didn't want the boss to see it so they disabled it so no one would know (unless they hacked it, which is what they had to do to enable Hot Coffee).
No, it's the fact that the people who legislate the games aren't the ones who play them. They also don't realize that "Hot Coffee" wasn't made by Rockstar Games, "GTA" was. "Hot Coffee" was something some bored programmer threw in there as an Easter egg for his own enjoyment.
Because they're two different children with different experiences and separate minds. Maybe one gets more attention than the other, maybe one wants a lot of attention. . .
We can blame the child but it would be useless because until a certain age, he doesn't know better and has no idea of the consequence of his actions. And once he's past that point he's already got his own personality and way of thinking, and his own set of experiences that are beyond his control which are affecting the courses of action he takes.
Second of all. . . Columbine involved shooting unarmed children. In fact, Columbine was shooting unarmed children. That's all that happened - two kids with low self-esteem went to school pissed off about how poorly their classmates treated them and killed a bunch of people. That's pretty much all there was to it. You can't turn it any other way - killing kids wasn't just something that happened behind-the-scenes that they didn't want you to know about like in WWII with killing the Jews.
Which is precisely why this game was made. Killing kids isn't normal. You're fucked up if you just one day decide to go kill a bunch of kids and then go kill yourself.
But people won't talk about it. According to them, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were just bad kids, and that's that. They don't want to think about what happened to these kids that made them do this, and therefore they aren't thinking of real, effective ways to prevent it from happening in the future (yeah, they outlawed guns and knives in schools, big deal - it doesn't take a gun or knife to kill someone). A better way would be to figure out what made these kids want to do this, and fix that. I guarantee you that these kids would've done something similar even if they couldn't have gotten weapons into school. I don't know exactly what, maybe they'd've kicked the shit out of people or something, but they would've done something bad nonetheless.
And there are "WWII extermination camp simulator" style games: "KZ Manager"
"KZ Manager"
Other companies will be made of all new people and they'll try Linux.
And actually, just about any startup would probably be looking at open-source simply because they haven't hit the big-time yet and don't have a lot of money to use MS products.
I KNOWS HOW TO CLICK STUFF ON THE INTERWEBS TUBES Which brings me to the question. . . why was the entire contents of the link restated in the summary? If I want to read it, I'll click the link.
Only if the end condition is not met in the first cycle.
I'm sure this is a misquote.
He can already crack WEP in under five minutes, I could see where he could possibly crack WEP in a single "for" loop or something using recursion (in which case why would it need to loop? Maybe if something goes wrong, the router doesn't respond or something).
And then SHA1 and RSA encryption would be his next target, and eventually he'd get it to where he can crack that in a single "for" loop.
Yes, but people at least tried AppleWorks and found that they didn't like it. If they had found that they liked it as well as (or better than) Office they wouldn't have bought Office. Nothing's wrong with that - they gave AppleWorks a try and found that they preferred Office.
"A typical home user trying to use linux would pay money. They will buy a distro at the local store which often charges for their update service and technical support as part of the price. Most of them are not tech savvy enough to pick another distro with free packages or compile software."
Yes, most people do pay for Linux. And $69 for OSX is reasonable (never used it myself but it certainly looks cool - and I've only heard good things about it).
However, neither of those comes close to XP Pro's $200 pricetag.
For most people it's not only about price, it's a balance between price and worth. Is Linux worth the $50 (or whatever) you pay at the store? Is it worth the free CD Ubuntu sends you in the mail? Is OSX worth $69? IMO, yes.
But is XP Pro -- which costs $100 to $150 more, and has all the same features (even less, in some cases) -- really worth buying? Is Office 2003 Basic Edition worth $190 -- especially when WordPerfect Office X3 Home costs about half that price, and OpenOffice is free? IMO, no.
Good products are worth paying for. Overpriced products are, well, overpriced - and most people won't buy them if they know of a good, compatible alternative. And it seems to me that MS products (well, Windows and Office, anyway) tend to be overpriced.