Because we only adopt "market-based" solutions when they benefit the existing oligarchs. Putting a fair price on a shared resource in order to establish an efficient market is SOCIALIST AND THEREFORE EVIL.
Taxation is a "market-based solution"? I fear you're letting your dogma cloud your thinking.
Well - I'd guess it helps in situations where an organization is stuck with Active Directory and such; now they can still have the server itself under linux, but get the throughput needed for file serving, etc out of Windows? Hm. Not exactly clear myself - I'm making this up as I go, at the moment.
Software that automatically changes menus or frequently-used options around as a "favor" to the user was bad UI practice five years ago in Windows and Office
Very very true.
, and it's bad UI practice today in Firefox.
That would be true if that were what it was doing. There are a couple of differences that make it an invalid comparison. History and bookmarks are changing all the time. It is a reasonable expectation that any view into them will change. For comparsion, that's like expecting google search results for current news to never change.
In addition, we're not talking about a menu or other typically fixed GUI elements here -- we're talking about data in a dropdown list, which is generally the kind of location you would expect dynamic data to be populated into.
Outside of that, the address bar gives me very consistent results, including only minor variances based on recent history and bookmark changes. Perhaps if I had experienced what you seem to (a different set of results every time I type?) then I would find it as annoying as you do.
Maybe you don't want your wife and kids to have porn urls popping up on the browser
Maybe if you're married & have children you shouldn't be looking at porn, then you wouldn't have that problem...
Eh? Why not? What has one to do with the other? Why::looks around conspiratorially:: I hear tell that some people like to look at porn with their spouses!
That's not a bad way to go about it. But it's a chicken and egg kinda thing. Vendors won't start distributing 64 bit windows apps until chipmakers force them too. Chipmakers won't force them too until Windows refuses 32 bit support. Windows won't refuse 32 bit support while vendors refuse to distribute 64 bit apps.
I agree there's nothing stopping it - but as long as it's not being done (and as long as closed source vendors such as Adobe are not shipping 64 bit versions of their products) , we're still going to be stuck with 32 bit support in Windows-land at least.
Just another shinny new name for a bloated server... A Jboss server needs here one MINUTE to load. the Apache Tomcat server? Just 4 seconds
That's like comparing a Geo Metro to a Cadillac and complaining that the Cadillac is so damned heavy. Oh, shit. You've made me do a car analogy. I'm so very sorry. Rest assured, someone will come along and make it even worse - it's a weird compulsion people have here.
And yes, I know the Jboss have "lots of features". But nothing I cannot make by myself as needed and using a lot less memory.
Ahh, now I begin to see. Let me guess... you're in your early twenties, and figure that the only code that's worth shit is what you wrote yourself?
You're right and wrong, I think. $1 has virtually no value -- you can't even get a cup of coffee on $1. It's no surprise that people treat it that way.
On the other hand, if I find a game for the blackberry that I like, and that provides me hours of mindless escape -- surely that has value to me. And if I can reward the developer of this game with something as insignificant as a dollar in order to continue playing the game, how is that in any way a bad thing?
I'd further argue that this does not cause the companies to be overvalued. Unlike the recent trend of relying on advertising (literally becoming the middleman in a sale of the attention of other people), here you have a company that is producing something of value that cost actual time and effort. Assuming that they can do so in the future, the same question -- how is this a bad thing?
And why are we helping by writing articles about it, and further advertising them on the front page slashdot?
For every thousand people who read this and say "that's just wrong", there's one or two who says "Hmmm, interesting." And for every few dozen of those, there's an app developer that's saying "Maybe I should find out how much this costs."
I agree that you want to know what the user needs to do. But if someone makes it very clear what they want to do (play a movie from DVD )the solution is not to tell them they don't want to play a movie from DVD, but they want to rip it, store it locally , then play it back.
That's providing a workaround (which he did not ask for), but not solving the problem (which he did ask for).
So yes- it's important to understand what the user wants to do. It's equally important to understand that telling them they're doing it wrong and giving them something different is not what they asked for -- and shouldn't be confused with solving their problem. Kinda of like when several years ago when I asked how to get set up to play mP3. (This was in the time before it was a matter of searching the ubuntu forums for the right repository to add.)
The answer? I needed to re-rip my music into OGG. That I was, in fact, kind of stupid for using a patent-encumbered format to begin with. By their definition I was taking a poor course of action to begin with - but I had my reasons (such as I had neither time nor inclination to re-rip hundreds of CDs, in order to listen to music that Windows could play just fine). Being told I was doing it wrong didn't solve my problem.
So while sometimes the user really doesn't know there's a better way, other times the user is aware of what he's doing, has valid reasons for it -- and isn't helped by being told he's doing it wrong.
Or - you can believe that your solutions are so superior, that it must be a deficiency in their own thought processes that gets people annoyed with you when you point out how wrong they are.
Finally, a sane voice in the crowd. I've been saying this ever since Intel and AMD started making 64-bit CPUs. There is no reason to support 32-bit right now. It just confuses people and keeps us from advancing technology and software. Hell, I would love to see AMD/Intel drop support for all the x86 instructions and just stick to the new x86-64 ones. There are a lot of hacks required for backwards compatibility of x86. Hell, switch to a new architecture.
There's a big difference between "not shipping 32 bit OS's" and "not supporting 32 bit". The latter would break the majority of software out there for the Windows platform, since very very few companies are shipping 64-bit versions of their products. And I don't mean just closed source software either - major players like Firefox and OOo do not offer 64 bit builds. (In the case of FF, it's available but only through third parties last I checked). The former - shipping only 64 bit OS's is a lot more reasonable, since most 64-bit OS installations can support both 32 and 64 bit applications.
Does it? Seems to be much more significant to FF users if anyone at all. That is: FF has an 80% fail rate. IE has a 20% fail rate. The rest is just an anti-MS spin.
In that prior thread (wow, you had to reach far back to find an example that was even close), I was responding directly to the point raised in the parent - which I did read. Whether I read the preceding conversation or not I can no longer recall - I likely did, but it's irrelevant to the point.
In your post here, you replied directly to the summary and your reply ignored that he pointed out having tried all of the configuring and tweaking he could find to do.
So what conversation should I have read? And how would it have revealed this information to me:
i'll spell it out for since i don't expect you to do any reading. linux power management doesn't work that well because most systems are not fully ACPI compliant and cheat using their windows-only drivers.
which was mentioned neither in the summary, nor in your reply to it. In case you've forgotten, this is what you wrote:
ever heard of power management?
it's on by default in windows.
maybe you should figure out what your settings are for linux?
I don't see ACPI, Windows drivers cheats, or anything else mentioned in that post - which comprises the extent of the conversation you allege I did not read.
You posted a shot from the hip in the form of a mildly snarky comment, and got called on it. Life goes on.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of lawyers only serve to help themselves (and their evil clients), and harm society in the process.
I would say that the vast majority of lawyers do work that is neither visible to, nor impactful to the rest of the world. Contract law, estate law, family law, there are tons of areas of law which are filled with far more people just doing a day's work than those enforcing the evil whims of giant corporations and greedy thieves.
The greedy ones stand out precisely because they are the exception and not the norm. It's kind of like how the news doesn't generally report on everything going well; and how we don't notice that the majority of the drivers on the road manage to drive in a fairly competent and attentive manner: it's always the exceptions that stand out.
Worse than that: Android is a a complete deviation from industry standard in mobile java code. Have code you've used before? Too bad, it doesn't work anymore. What, it works on any phone that supports J2ME (that is to say, almost every phone out there today)? That's also too bad, it won't work here. Write it again, and this time do it the google way.
Slashdot Mirror
Because we only adopt "market-based" solutions when they benefit the existing oligarchs. Putting a fair price on a shared resource in order to establish an efficient market is SOCIALIST AND THEREFORE EVIL.
Taxation is a "market-based solution"? I fear you're letting your dogma cloud your thinking.
Well - I'd guess it helps in situations where an organization is stuck with Active Directory and such; now they can still have the server itself under linux, but get the throughput needed for file serving, etc out of Windows? Hm. Not exactly clear myself - I'm making this up as I go, at the moment.
Software that automatically changes menus or frequently-used options around as a "favor" to the user was bad UI practice five years ago in Windows and Office
Very very true.
, and it's bad UI practice today in Firefox.
That would be true if that were what it was doing. There are a couple of differences that make it an invalid comparison. History and bookmarks are changing all the time. It is a reasonable expectation that any view into them will change. For comparsion, that's like expecting google search results for current news to never change.
In addition, we're not talking about a menu or other typically fixed GUI elements here -- we're talking about data in a dropdown list, which is generally the kind of location you would expect dynamic data to be populated into.
Outside of that, the address bar gives me very consistent results, including only minor variances based on recent history and bookmark changes. Perhaps if I had experienced what you seem to (a different set of results every time I type?) then I would find it as annoying as you do.
Then making it a configurable option: Enable/disable. Or am I missing something?
Or just make it an attribute of each bookmark - "include in address bar searches".
Maybe you don't want your wife and kids to have porn urls popping up on the browser
Maybe if you're married & have children you shouldn't be looking at porn, then you wouldn't have that problem...
Eh? Why not? What has one to do with the other? Why ::looks around conspiratorially:: I hear tell that some people like to look at porn with their spouses!
I suppose this is a good thing, and I'm a big fan of the virtualization, but really, why? Windows fails to compel.
Fortunately, whether or not you personally see the use of something is not a deciding factor whether it gets done ;)
Ahh, there it is! whooooooosh.
That's not a bad way to go about it. But it's a chicken and egg kinda thing. Vendors won't start distributing 64 bit windows apps until chipmakers force them too. Chipmakers won't force them too until Windows refuses 32 bit support. Windows won't refuse 32 bit support while vendors refuse to distribute 64 bit apps.
I agree there's nothing stopping it - but as long as it's not being done (and as long as closed source vendors such as Adobe are not shipping 64 bit versions of their products) , we're still going to be stuck with 32 bit support in Windows-land at least.
Fair enough. That's what I get for making assumptions.
Ugh. "Just begun". Damnit.
It's no coincidence to me that this hand is being forced as our country comes out of a lengthy and somewhat painful recession
Coming out? My friend, the fun has only just begin - though I agree that the symptoms may be masked for another few years.
Just another shinny new name for a bloated server... A Jboss server needs here one MINUTE to load. the Apache Tomcat server? Just 4 seconds
That's like comparing a Geo Metro to a Cadillac and complaining that the Cadillac is so damned heavy. Oh, shit. You've made me do a car analogy. I'm so very sorry. Rest assured, someone will come along and make it even worse - it's a weird compulsion people have here.
And yes, I know the Jboss have "lots of features". But nothing I cannot make by myself as needed and using a lot less memory.
Ahh, now I begin to see. Let me guess... you're in your early twenties, and figure that the only code that's worth shit is what you wrote yourself?
On the other hand, if I find a game for the blackberry that I like, and that provides me hours of mindless escape -- surely that has value to me. And if I can reward the developer of this game with something as insignificant as a dollar in order to continue playing the game, how is that in any way a bad thing?
I'd further argue that this does not cause the companies to be overvalued. Unlike the recent trend of relying on advertising (literally becoming the middleman in a sale of the attention of other people), here you have a company that is producing something of value that cost actual time and effort. Assuming that they can do so in the future, the same question -- how is this a bad thing?
For every thousand people who read this and say "that's just wrong", there's one or two who says "Hmmm, interesting." And for every few dozen of those, there's an app developer that's saying "Maybe I should find out how much this costs."
I agree that you want to know what the user needs to do. But if someone makes it very clear what they want to do (play a movie from DVD )the solution is not to tell them they don't want to play a movie from DVD, but they want to rip it, store it locally , then play it back.
That's providing a workaround (which he did not ask for), but not solving the problem (which he did ask for).
So yes- it's important to understand what the user wants to do. It's equally important to understand that telling them they're doing it wrong and giving them something different is not what they asked for -- and shouldn't be confused with solving their problem. Kinda of like when several years ago when I asked how to get set up to play mP3. (This was in the time before it was a matter of searching the ubuntu forums for the right repository to add.)
The answer? I needed to re-rip my music into OGG. That I was, in fact, kind of stupid for using a patent-encumbered format to begin with. By their definition I was taking a poor course of action to begin with - but I had my reasons (such as I had neither time nor inclination to re-rip hundreds of CDs, in order to listen to music that Windows could play just fine). Being told I was doing it wrong didn't solve my problem.
So while sometimes the user really doesn't know there's a better way, other times the user is aware of what he's doing, has valid reasons for it -- and isn't helped by being told he's doing it wrong.
Or - you can believe that your solutions are so superior, that it must be a deficiency in their own thought processes that gets people annoyed with you when you point out how wrong they are.
The correct solution here is not to avoid playing it with DVD -- that's blaming the user.
Finally, a sane voice in the crowd. I've been saying this ever since Intel and AMD started making 64-bit CPUs. There is no reason to support 32-bit right now. It just confuses people and keeps us from advancing technology and software. Hell, I would love to see AMD/Intel drop support for all the x86 instructions and just stick to the new x86-64 ones. There are a lot of hacks required for backwards compatibility of x86. Hell, switch to a new architecture.
There's a big difference between "not shipping 32 bit OS's" and "not supporting 32 bit". The latter would break the majority of software out there for the Windows platform, since very very few companies are shipping 64-bit versions of their products. And I don't mean just closed source software either - major players like Firefox and OOo do not offer 64 bit builds. (In the case of FF, it's available but only through third parties last I checked). The former - shipping only 64 bit OS's is a lot more reasonable, since most 64-bit OS installations can support both 32 and 64 bit applications.
Uh, sorry to the parent poster, I've rambled a bit off the point I was originally making and probably just told you a load of stuff you already knew!
Aw come on, admit it - you typed that sentence first didn't you!
Does it? Seems to be much more significant to FF users if anyone at all. That is: FF has an 80% fail rate. IE has a 20% fail rate. The rest is just an anti-MS spin.
In that prior thread (wow, you had to reach far back to find an example that was even close), I was responding directly to the point raised in the parent - which I did read. Whether I read the preceding conversation or not I can no longer recall - I likely did, but it's irrelevant to the point.
In your post here, you replied directly to the summary and your reply ignored that he pointed out having tried all of the configuring and tweaking he could find to do.
So what conversation should I have read? And how would it have revealed this information to me:
i'll spell it out for since i don't expect you to do any reading. linux power management doesn't work that well because most systems are not fully ACPI compliant and cheat using their windows-only drivers.
which was mentioned neither in the summary, nor in your reply to it. In case you've forgotten, this is what you wrote:
ever heard of power management? it's on by default in windows. maybe you should figure out what your settings are for linux?
I don't see ACPI, Windows drivers cheats, or anything else mentioned in that post - which comprises the extent of the conversation you allege I did not read.
You posted a shot from the hip in the form of a mildly snarky comment, and got called on it. Life goes on.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of lawyers only serve to help themselves (and their evil clients), and harm society in the process.
I would say that the vast majority of lawyers do work that is neither visible to, nor impactful to the rest of the world. Contract law, estate law, family law, there are tons of areas of law which are filled with far more people just doing a day's work than those enforcing the evil whims of giant corporations and greedy thieves.
The greedy ones stand out precisely because they are the exception and not the norm. It's kind of like how the news doesn't generally report on everything going well; and how we don't notice that the majority of the drivers on the road manage to drive in a fairly competent and attentive manner: it's always the exceptions that stand out.
ever heard of power management?
Have you heard of reading the summary?
it's on by default in windows.
It's off by default in most Slashdot readers.
maybe you should figure out what your settings are for linux?
Maybe you should learn how to turn that setting on before posting?
I read that as "Failpoint accused of faking..." Though, given the details, I guess that would have been a pretty accurate headline too.
Worse than that: Android is a a complete deviation from industry standard in mobile java code. Have code you've used before? Too bad, it doesn't work anymore. What, it works on any phone that supports J2ME (that is to say, almost every phone out there today)? That's also too bad, it won't work here. Write it again, and this time do it the google way.