Yeah, I know. I live in this fantasy world that operates on the assumption that users aren't actually stupid enough to open everything that crosses their path.
Some of us don't keep every application we use in the course of a day open for the entire day -- when running development or modeling software that takes hundreds of MB or more, that extra 100MB that OO.o (and other bloated apps like acroreader) take up is a waste of space; so I open them when I need them, and close them when I'm done.
Why essential? I've not been running AV for years except a periodic ClamAV scan "just in case", and yet somehow have not been infected. And all on Windows, at that...
Actually, on-access scans are resource hogs on a live workstation, and are not worth the overhead when all you need to do is exercise some common sense in the things that you open.
If only it were that easy. Every time I've sent my resume to a recruiter in PDF format they've asked me to send it again as a Word doc.
Recruiters/headhunters will often need to reformat your resume to a standard appearance before spamming clients with it; so they need something that they have the ability to edit.
You shouldn't, on the other hand, run into this when applying to individual companies.
It has, in many ways. However, in comparison to Office, it's still slow to startup (unless you want to sacrifice some resources to the pre-loader) and bloated.
Before someone points out that office has a preloader too - I'm aware, and I'm referring to startup times with both office and OO preloaders disabled.
Actually, keep them closed during the day if you ahve a window that faces the sun. Otherwise, you're paying extra for cooling. (Or you just have a hotter home if you're not using cooling)
Actually, it's more like IJ is claiming that this is the case - perhaps to get senesationalist headlines. If they were attempting to use the law as the IJ article describes, then it's pretty clear that they wouldn't stand a chance. Which would make it a waste of time to even try...
IANAL, but I don't think PC Mag or "CW33" read the law. Per Section 4a1 and 4b, it only applies if you're specifically snooping in the data on the computer. It says nothing about normal repair. Not that someone disgruntled couldn't try to make a case out of it...
Was just about to post the same. Even snooping data is covered, such as recovering lost HD data for a customer. As long as you are not furnishing that data to law enforcement or the Court, then you have no concerns.
That sounds great, until you realize that you're charged for receiving text messages, and that you cannot stop people (or spammers) from sending them to you.
This is English, after all - the language that lets you be mad while you're going mad. It allows you to act naturally while wearing slacks that are too tight, alone together listening to soft rock with your pretty ugly mate.
A good point - checking just now does show that their prices are a lot more reasonable. Still slightly over the price I can get for (presumably) comparable RAM elsewhere, but no longer 2x as much.
As far as differing prices: that's not something I've had a problem with in the past, though I"ve seen reports of some relatively uncommon situations where it happens.
That'll mess up corporate vpn users with clout, and https connections to banks etc.
Probably not. In normal circumstances, these connections don't use anywhere near the same raw data transfer volume as one bittorrent with a few dozen connections.
I think you're missing the point. Dell already charges a hefty markup on components -- a year back, I priced the same RAM as 2x more expensive at Dell than at Newegg. So this basically means that Apple's markup is that much beyond the conventional markup that comparable companies provide.
THe car analogy would be a do-it-yourself oil change for $14, a Ford and Toyota dealers charging $30 for the service, and Mercedes dealers charging $90 for the same service.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I know. I live in this fantasy world that operates on the assumption that users aren't actually stupid enough to open everything that crosses their path.
Some of us don't keep every application we use in the course of a day open for the entire day -- when running development or modeling software that takes hundreds of MB or more, that extra 100MB that OO.o (and other bloated apps like acroreader) take up is a waste of space; so I open them when I need them, and close them when I'm done.
Erm... CSS and image files can install a virus?
Personally, I wish they'd write a secure user. Then AV wouldn't be necessary.
Why essential? I've not been running AV for years except a periodic ClamAV scan "just in case", and yet somehow have not been infected. And all on Windows, at that...
Actually, on-access scans are resource hogs on a live workstation, and are not worth the overhead when all you need to do is exercise some common sense in the things that you open.
So wait... you're saying that OO.o is the excrement?
If only it were that easy. Every time I've sent my resume to a recruiter in PDF format they've asked me to send it again as a Word doc.
Recruiters/headhunters will often need to reformat your resume to a standard appearance before spamming clients with it; so they need something that they have the ability to edit.
You shouldn't, on the other hand, run into this when applying to individual companies.
In mine, if you disable it for both, MSO still starts quite a bit faster...
It has, in many ways. However, in comparison to Office, it's still slow to startup (unless you want to sacrifice some resources to the pre-loader) and bloated.
Before someone points out that office has a preloader too - I'm aware, and I'm referring to startup times with both office and OO preloaders disabled.
Nah, that's why every privacy statement out there has a clause that reads similar to "... unless required by court order."
I know this is offtopic to the article, but ontopic to the parent post.
Don't apologize... it's the way discussions are supposed to work. Too bad that more mods don't realize it.
This post is, sadly, only tangentally ontopic since I'm replying to something that wasn't the main point of your poost. Alas.
Actually, keep them closed during the day if you ahve a window that faces the sun. Otherwise, you're paying extra for cooling. (Or you just have a hotter home if you're not using cooling)
Actually, it's more like IJ is claiming that this is the case - perhaps to get senesationalist headlines. If they were attempting to use the law as the IJ article describes, then it's pretty clear that they wouldn't stand a chance. Which would make it a waste of time to even try...
Maybe it's for people like you that this law was made - I hope it becomes common in other states. Your job is to fix the computers, not to snoop them.
IANAL, but I don't think PC Mag or "CW33" read the law. Per Section 4a1 and 4b, it only applies if you're specifically snooping in the data on the computer. It says nothing about normal repair. Not that someone disgruntled couldn't try to make a case out of it...
Was just about to post the same. Even snooping data is covered, such as recovering lost HD data for a customer. As long as you are not furnishing that data to law enforcement or the Court, then you have no concerns.
Why do that?
That sounds great, until you realize that you're charged for receiving text messages, and that you cannot stop people (or spammers) from sending them to you.
This is English, after all - the language that lets you be mad while you're going mad. It allows you to act naturally while wearing slacks that are too tight, alone together listening to soft rock with your pretty ugly mate.
You expect logic here?
Really, really far. Especially in public places.
Presumably they are comparable; but even if this is not the case, are they so far different as to justify /that much/ of a price gap?
A good point - checking just now does show that their prices are a lot more reasonable. Still slightly over the price I can get for (presumably) comparable RAM elsewhere, but no longer 2x as much.
As far as differing prices: that's not something I've had a problem with in the past, though I"ve seen reports of some relatively uncommon situations where it happens.
Yet it doesn't say it should not be used that way.
That'll mess up corporate vpn users with clout, and https connections to banks etc.
Probably not. In normal circumstances, these connections don't use anywhere near the same raw data transfer volume as one bittorrent with a few dozen connections.
THe car analogy would be a do-it-yourself oil change for $14, a Ford and Toyota dealers charging $30 for the service, and Mercedes dealers charging $90 for the same service.