No mod points today for me, so let me just say it: that's damn funny. Perhaps to those of us who haven't watched someone close to them die from the disease over a period of years.
Well, for one thing, XP has the 'phone home and kill Bill's ring' feature of mandatory validation. I prefer buying something and not requiring 'clearance' from anybody to install it on my machine and use it Understandable, but I'd say that falls under "new 'features' that people don't needs" as opposed to breakage, at least for the vast majority of the purchasing public. As far as the rest: to each his own. I just use XP and set to the "classic" interface; there's something about receiving regular security updates that I like. Call me kooky.
Other than that, I continually mourn the loss of the very efficient Windows NT4.0 file search function.
So it's just like when XP came out? From what I recall everyone thought it was terrible and wanted to use Windows 2000 instead. Not really. Windows 2000 -> WIndows XP simply didn't add anything that people needed. Windows XP -> Vista actually breaks things that people already have.
Ummm... bioware didn't sell to anybody. Might want to read a little closer, Bioware had no say in this at all. Their parent company, VG Holdings, are the ones who sold out. Bioware and Pandemic, being wholly own subsidiary companies, are without choice in the matter.
As far as the 200 dollar disconnect fee, I don't agree with that with any carrier, and some use it as a bludgeoning stick to keep people continuing their service under the threat of "breach of contract". The termination itself isn't a bad thing - you agree to it when you sign up. What I find particularly annoying is this (AT&T): when you are six months away from the end of your new contract, you become "eligible" to upgrade your phone - and at a great discount, of course. It just so happens that to receive that discount, you need to sign up for/another/ two year plan.
By itself, that's a little sleazy but not unreasonable. It's not like they make it a secret. WHat makes it fairly despicable, though, is that most modern phones after 1.5 years are on the verge of falling apart. So your choices become: terminate early and pay a huge fee to switch carriers; pay full price for a phone; or take the 'easy' choice and pay a discount rate, signing up for another two years.
It doesn't come across as troll or offtopic, just misinformed. If you can swap out an unused page of code or data to provide more room for disk cache, why not do it? You should take a look at what your OS is actually doing with memory some time. Except presumably, sooner or later I will want that code or data back in memory -- at which point I now have to wait, for the benefit of having some more files cached that I may or may not be referring to multiple times...
I was actually thinking of 2k3 when I said current-day Office, I should have made that more clear. Personally, I would like to see projects such as this attempting to innovate on their own, instead of attempting to be MS-Office clones. Yet I can understand the need for it to be the way it is. People are unlikely enough to try it if it's a familiar interface; if they are given something completely new from a group they haven't really heard of, it becomes even less likely.
It's like if my lawyer-friend were driving a car, and had to click an unlock button before being able to use the turn signal. Mmm... okay, not anything at all to do with that, but I couldn't resist upon seeing the sig. You are correct, of course, but as you recognized the principle still applies. It's just one of those little quirks that can add up to a smoother, user-friendly experience.
True as far as it goes -- but that was 10 years ago. Doesn't OO bill itself as a replacement of MS Office of today? (BTW, don't get me wrong - I use OO at home because the price is unbeatable, and it does everything I need -- it just has a few quirks like this that annoy the crap out of me;)
... I still can't add a word to the dictionary with just one click. Try it for yourself, you'll see. Make a typo, right-click on the word once the squiggly red underline appears. It gives suggestions, and not an "Add" menu -- but a submenu. So me, the uncaring user, just wants to add this to the dictionary. I pick "Add" submenu, then I am faced with a choice. "soffice.dic", "standard.dic" and "sun.dic". Um... what? Why should I care? What happens if I pick the wrong one? Is there a wrong one? Why do I have to make this decision? Screw this, I'm going back to MS Office! (Okay, slight hyperbole with that last.)
Unfortunately, this is a classic example of why open source software designed for mass use needs more contributors familiar with basic usability concepts. This way, end users could spend less time playing with their dics, and more time accomplishing their goals.
The real issue is that systems come with Internet Explorer and Outlook Express preloaded. Education is the solution. Users can learn that if they do not run these two applications, they will by default be protected from the vast majority of malware.
Or the 50 year old man has donated , and his marrow has been used by several recipients in the same geographic area...
Well, the original items were about stem cells from umbilical cords, but I suppose the same issue would also apply to any other bone marrow transplants. Hm, forgot about that - it's what happens when I wait a day between replies. Still, it would (theoretically) be the same for other marrow transplants as you say.
"Sure, my client's DNA was found at the scene, but knowing as you know do that at least one other person shares that DNA, the choice before you is no choice at all."...
"After all, there is no way of knowing for sure whether this cold-blooded murder was committed by my client, a 50 year old man from Portland, or by a 3-year old toddler from Orlando". Or the 50 year old man has donated , and his marrow has been used by several recipients in the same geographic area...
not necessarily true. All that is necessary is reasonable doubt. "Sure, my client's DNA was found at the scene, but knowing as you know do that at least one other person shares that DNA, the choice before you is no choice at all."...
Same here, except: 1) I use a hardware firewall since I need to connect multiple computers to the Internet anyway, and use windows file sharing on my LAN. 2) No antivirus except clam, which I run once a month to make sure I haven't done something stupid.
It's amazing how unnecessary all the bloated antivirus, firewall and other security software is. Of course, this 'study' highlights that "on noes, a lot of people not using AV!" which is only natural considering the source.
The fact is, the simple act of disabling Outlook Express and Internet Explorer by default on new computers would probably put most antivirus companies out of business.
Hmm. I don't agree with what I'm about to say, but I have to say it - it's the devil's advocate in me: technically speaking, that's not in conflict with what the rep stated: When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song.
Making a copy of a CD for archival purposes is not the same as ripping songs for playback in additional devices.
I tried to use Amazon's MP3 download store only to be stymied by the completely anemic search and sorting capabilities. Choose to search by "Song title" and type in a phrase. You get back all matches to song title, album title and artist. WTF? Worse, I could not find a way to sort the list by song title. Ex: Search for song title "Mary". The first 28 results don't have "Mary" in the song title!
Sorry, but iTunes is just an infinitely easier to use store than the Amazon web site; and have you SEEN the Wireless iTunes Music store??
I had no problem searching; my issues came with downloading. I purchased the music while at work, and agreed to use their downloaded -- it amounted to saving $5 to download the entire album of MP3s at once, and $7 over the physical price. Only to find out that the downloader can't handle a proxy server -- a fact which is never advertised. No problem, I say to myself, and forward the download file to my home address.
I launch the downloader at home, and find out that all my songs are no longer available for download! So I contact them, talk to an Indian gentleman to whom I have to repeat everything three times; then get transfered to the digital download support department.
He's an understanding fellow, more or less. He first tries to tell me that they only allow one download; but I explain that I know what and did not receive my one download, then I explain it again for goo measure. Finally he seems to get it, and sets up the download so that I can get one track at a time through my 'digital library' page. Great! It only took another 10 minutes, but at least they were nice about it.
So I go down the list and download each file. I do them all at the same time. But when the download dust clears, tracks 4,13,16 are nowhere to be found. I try to download them by clicking the links and am told, "You have already downloaded this song."
I just paid the extra $2.89 to purchase the songs again. It wasn't worth another 10 minutes of my time, and was still a net gain over purchasing the physical medium. Still, it was a very frustrating and irritating experience. I will probably give them one more chance, but unless it's a flawless experience it'll be my last.
You know, if you don't share out the music tracks with your information embedded into them, then you will never, ever have to worry about someone getting a hold of any information about you from them. Just a thought.
The problem with that comes in taking pride in your work. If I work on a project for months and get it finished; then it turns out that the product has problems, yes, I'll work overtime to fix issues that should not have been there to begin with. To walk away and say "Sorry, you're not paying me for this" is essentially saying "Yeah, I delivered my part of it. I never promised it was going to work, but here's the code. Have fun!"
In other words, in my opinion they are not paying me for hours, they are paying me for work. If that work is not complete in the time I said it would be, or if it is complete with issues, it doesn't and shouldn't matter to the employer -- they've paid me for the finished product, which I am then obligated to deliver.
Slashdot Mirror
Then what are you doing here bitching and moaning?
Other than that, I continually mourn the loss of the very efficient Windows NT4.0 file search function.
We agree at least that it doesn't bode well for any future titles that may come from EAoware
Ummm... bioware didn't sell to anybody. Might want to read a little closer, Bioware had no say in this at all. Their parent company, VG Holdings, are the ones who sold out. Bioware and Pandemic, being wholly own subsidiary companies, are without choice in the matter.
By itself, that's a little sleazy but not unreasonable. It's not like they make it a secret. WHat makes it fairly despicable, though, is that most modern phones after 1.5 years are on the verge of falling apart. So your choices become: terminate early and pay a huge fee to switch carriers; pay full price for a phone; or take the 'easy' choice and pay a discount rate, signing up for another two years.
I was actually thinking of 2k3 when I said current-day Office, I should have made that more clear. Personally, I would like to see projects such as this attempting to innovate on their own, instead of attempting to be MS-Office clones. Yet I can understand the need for it to be the way it is. People are unlikely enough to try it if it's a familiar interface; if they are given something completely new from a group they haven't really heard of, it becomes even less likely.
It's like if my lawyer-friend were driving a car, and had to click an unlock button before being able to use the turn signal. Mmm... okay, not anything at all to do with that, but I couldn't resist upon seeing the sig. You are correct, of course, but as you recognized the principle still applies. It's just one of those little quirks that can add up to a smoother, user-friendly experience.
True as far as it goes -- but that was 10 years ago. Doesn't OO bill itself as a replacement of MS Office of today? (BTW, don't get me wrong - I use OO at home because the price is unbeatable, and it does everything I need -- it just has a few quirks like this that annoy the crap out of me ;)
Nope, but that's a good point - I will do so.
... I still can't add a word to the dictionary with just one click. Try it for yourself, you'll see. Make a typo, right-click on the word once the squiggly red underline appears. It gives suggestions, and not an "Add" menu -- but a submenu. So me, the uncaring user, just wants to add this to the dictionary. I pick "Add" submenu, then I am faced with a choice. "soffice.dic", "standard.dic" and "sun.dic". Um... what? Why should I care? What happens if I pick the wrong one? Is there a wrong one? Why do I have to make this decision? Screw this, I'm going back to MS Office! (Okay, slight hyperbole with that last.)
Unfortunately, this is a classic example of why open source software designed for mass use needs more contributors familiar with basic usability concepts. This way, end users could spend less time playing with their dics, and more time accomplishing their goals.
Fixed some typos for you:
The real issue is that systems come with Internet Explorer and Outlook Express preloaded. Education is the solution. Users can learn that if they do not run these two applications, they will by default be protected from the vast majority of malware.
Well, the original items were about stem cells from umbilical cords, but I suppose the same issue would also apply to any other bone marrow transplants. Hm, forgot about that - it's what happens when I wait a day between replies. Still, it would (theoretically) be the same for other marrow transplants as you say.
"After all, there is no way of knowing for sure whether this cold-blooded murder was committed by my client, a 50 year old man from Portland, or by a 3-year old toddler from Orlando". Or the 50 year old man has donated , and his marrow has been used by several recipients in the same geographic area...
not necessarily true. All that is necessary is reasonable doubt. "Sure, my client's DNA was found at the scene, but knowing as you know do that at least one other person shares that DNA, the choice before you is no choice at all."...
You go on ahead and get started playing with your wood without us. We'll catch up. Really.
Same here, except: 1) I use a hardware firewall since I need to connect multiple computers to the Internet anyway, and use windows file sharing on my LAN. 2) No antivirus except clam, which I run once a month to make sure I haven't done something stupid.
It's amazing how unnecessary all the bloated antivirus, firewall and other security software is. Of course, this 'study' highlights that "on noes, a lot of people not using AV!" which is only natural considering the source.
The fact is, the simple act of disabling Outlook Express and Internet Explorer by default on new computers would probably put most antivirus companies out of business.
Well said.
Hmm. I don't agree with what I'm about to say, but I have to say it - it's the devil's advocate in me: technically speaking, that's not in conflict with what the rep stated: When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song.
Making a copy of a CD for archival purposes is not the same as ripping songs for playback in additional devices.
This is what happens when a blog entry is accepted as "news for nerds".
I tried to use Amazon's MP3 download store only to be stymied by the completely anemic search and sorting capabilities. Choose to search by "Song title" and type in a phrase. You get back all matches to song title, album title and artist. WTF? Worse, I could not find a way to sort the list by song title. Ex: Search for song title "Mary". The first 28 results don't have "Mary" in the song title!
Sorry, but iTunes is just an infinitely easier to use store than the Amazon web site; and have you SEEN the Wireless iTunes Music store??
I had no problem searching; my issues came with downloading. I purchased the music while at work, and agreed to use their downloaded -- it amounted to saving $5 to download the entire album of MP3s at once, and $7 over the physical price. Only to find out that the downloader can't handle a proxy server -- a fact which is never advertised. No problem, I say to myself, and forward the download file to my home address.
I launch the downloader at home, and find out that all my songs are no longer available for download! So I contact them, talk to an Indian gentleman to whom I have to repeat everything three times; then get transfered to the digital download support department.
He's an understanding fellow, more or less. He first tries to tell me that they only allow one download; but I explain that I know what and did not receive my one download, then I explain it again for goo measure. Finally he seems to get it, and sets up the download so that I can get one track at a time through my 'digital library' page. Great! It only took another 10 minutes, but at least they were nice about it.
So I go down the list and download each file. I do them all at the same time. But when the download dust clears, tracks 4,13,16 are nowhere to be found. I try to download them by clicking the links and am told, "You have already downloaded this song."
I just paid the extra $2.89 to purchase the songs again. It wasn't worth another 10 minutes of my time, and was still a net gain over purchasing the physical medium. Still, it was a very frustrating and irritating experience. I will probably give them one more chance, but unless it's a flawless experience it'll be my last.
You know, if you don't share out the music tracks with your information embedded into them, then you will never, ever have to worry about someone getting a hold of any information about you from them. Just a thought.
The problem with that comes in taking pride in your work. If I work on a project for months and get it finished; then it turns out that the product has problems, yes, I'll work overtime to fix issues that should not have been there to begin with. To walk away and say "Sorry, you're not paying me for this" is essentially saying "Yeah, I delivered my part of it. I never promised it was going to work, but here's the code. Have fun!"
In other words, in my opinion they are not paying me for hours, they are paying me for work. If that work is not complete in the time I said it would be, or if it is complete with issues, it doesn't and shouldn't matter to the employer -- they've paid me for the finished product, which I am then obligated to deliver.