OK that's interesting, but it doesn't help the problem of RSS feeds. I use Netvibes to manage my feeds, and I'll still see the entry in my feed, get pissed, click, and flame.
Ah, the great circle of trolling.
People by and large just don't want to have to worry about their appearance when calling or emailing.
Right, just like people by and large don't care about how they look when using their computers. But they do! Ever since the webcam was invented, at least.
Uh... depends on your definition of "future," I guess. Microsoft is very much a lock-in company, and they're by far the most successful player in the personal computer market. So unless you're talking about monkeys writing Shakespeare, how can you say that Apple (or OS X) is doomed?
Do you really *want* your resume in their database? Personally, I'd much rather send my resume to a person who can ignore it because they're busy rather than to a database where it will be ignored because I forgot to mention the keyword "AJAX".
Although you raise an interesting question about the appropriateness of widespread network inclusion, I think the more important issue is that companies' databases will accommodate whatever formats they must. If you send in PDF, and I send in PDF, they'll adjust the system rather than keep reminding people to use.doc.
I do this routinely, whether exchanging papers with colleagues or submitting resumes. It has to do with the philosophy that I will not give you easy editing privileges on something that I created; a PDF, while alterable, still feels more like a sealed envelope to me than a blank postcard like a.doc.
If you remove the typo from your query, then the results are perfectly matched: 1,140,000 hits both for "XP less secure than Vista" and "Vista less secure than XP."
Thank you for realizing this. Gmail's numbers are at least actual people. My e-mail addresses have NEVER seen spam from a Gmail address, but I've seen hoards from Yahoo alone. Please don't swallow those inflated statistics without choking.
Very well said, but I think the reason the name is witty is because of the highly publicized (in academic literature, anyway) divide between IRL speech and IM-speak, or 1337 sp33k. I personally have been so socially inept as to say things like "IRL" IRL. I think that's what the Gaim--er, Pidgin guys were getting at.
In fact, American Indians have lived on the Equator in America for longer, yet they are lighter coloured than say, Africans.
This doesn't refute the argument at all; in fact, I would say it supports it, because it's scientific consensus that humans evolved in Africa and spread out from there. How would these humans have gotten to Central America? By walking across the land bridge between Russia and Alaska, of course, which is in the northern climates, where they would need lighter skin to survive. As their population progressed southward, their skintone began to darken again; of course they are not as dark as those who stayed in Africa, because they had some catching up to do.
They would? How exactly do you know this? China's businesses don't rely on domestic sales for their profit, they rely on exports. Despite the fact that you and others may dislike MS, the majority of the business world still uses Office. As long as that remains true, the Chinese will use it to accommodate their Western buyers.
I don't see the sense in this. Are the products they're exporting word processing documents? If not, it doesn't matter one bit what the customer is using as far as a word processor goes. Additionally, OpenOffice has always offered the ability to save as a MS Word.doc is need be; the Chinese companies could use this feature if a client specifically requested to see something.
More likely IMO is that China would continue to use ODF for all its internal documentation, which constitutes the vast majority of paperwork produced by any organization. This way they are guaranteed access to their own documents into the future, without being trapped into having to deal with a company to access certain closed formats.
At 128kb/s it's impossible for anyone to tell the difference between that and CD quality in your car stereo with road noise and other background.
I just threw away the moderations I made in this discussion to reply. I'm sorry, but just because you can't hear the difference between 128kb/s and FLAC, does not mean my hearing is also impaired. Maybe you are driving an old car with a sound system that was designed for AM, maybe FM radio. My car is not so ancient. I can absolutely tell the difference between those qualities. In fact, on my DAP, with headphones of substantially lower quality, I can tell when I'm listening to a 256kbps MP3 or a FLAC file. This is while on the bus or walking through noisy city streets, environments which I wager are noisier than the sealed interior of a car (though this is again dependent on the individual car).
As a wise poster above said, my decisions are not subject to your value judgments. Your inability to perceive a difference (a) does not mean the difference isn't there, and (b) does not mean I cannot perceive it.
Users can indeed have both, but they needn't pay. I for on keep Thunderbird installed on my laptop, and I store *all* my e-mail there. This is so I have access to my e-mail even in offline situations. Of course, because (theoretically) one can't always have a laptop handy, webmail is still a must. Both my Gmail and my university e-mail addresses support webmail access, and both also have POP access via Thunderbird.
So yes, one can indeed have the best of both worlds.
I don't mean to troll, but I think your impression would benefit from changing it to "zuh Germans." As a phonetic sample, "zuh" in this regard is much more highly attested than "zee."
How in the world is this marked "insightful"? There is so much misinformation in those two sentences its ridiculous.
1. The AppleTV plays MP3, AAC, AIFF, WAV, Apple Lossless, Mpeg4 and H.264 all non DRMd formats.
How were you marked "informative"? Does the AppleTV play FLAC? Because Quicktime sure doesn't. Ogg Vorbis files? Not without plugins from Xiph. It also doesn't play Xvid, an open format, which the GP was (IMO rightfully) griping about.
There's no excuse to exclude these open source formats unless Apple is trying to maintain utter control over the information being swapped between their products. I'm not trolling here; I'm typing this on a Macbook Pro. But I think it's pretty universal knowledge the Apple loves closed systems. This is just another realization of that.
I think the issue is that the hardware likely will not be "linux-capable," as it is unlikely that every component will be open. This is the motivation to pressure Dell into adding a Linux certification: it means hardware manufacturers will have to start considering opening up there hardware.
If you're happy with the crapware/reformat method, you're just asking for things to stay the same, or worse, become even more closed. I for one will never welcome closed-hardware overlords, and I'm going to bitch about it and boycott wherever necessary in order to make sure my opinion is understood by the companies responsible.
That's true, it definitely can't sync with everything yet, which is the biggest obstacle to its adoption. For anyone who's interested, though, I recently found a tool for iCal and GCal: http://blog.spanningsync.com/ Automatically backs up your calendars in case of corruption, but I have been syncing two ways, seamlessly, for weeks now. One step closer!
Back to Apple, because they never advertised it as 802.11n, customers couldn't in good conscience be considered to have bought it expecting.11n. Apple never guaranteed.11n functionality at time of purchase, so.11n functionality wasn't something they 'sold'.
I found this line rather stunning the first time I read it, in Norman's "The Design Of Everyday Things." For an expert on human-machine interaction, one would think he'd have a better grasp on the overriding sentiment that is, as you've said, "Stupid computer!"
I actually expect search and metadata (aka Spotlight) to take us further than 3D spinning virtual worlds...
Why not integrate the two? Sure, it's faster to click on Fred's from an alphabetical list, but why confuse the access method with the organization? That is, one should be able to input (whether by text or speech or, hell, thought) "Fred" and go right to his desk; but beside him, should there be people with alphabetically proximal names? I hardly think that'd be useful!
Look up "barber shop" in the yellow pages. You'll find what you need alphabetically, then can head to it using the address given. But when you arrive on the site, where are the other barber shops? They would all have dissimilar names ("Tim's," "Joe's," etc.), but it makes sense to have them filed together. In irreal spaces, this is possible. In fact, the user should be able to decide how access method relates to organization (though a sane default scheme should of course be decided upon).
So I embrace the idea of physical metaphors; learning happens through metaphor, and a lot of our most basic mental constructs are based on our perceptions of physical reality. And as for scrolling through text on a page as being the only way to read electronically, I nearly laugh at your lack of creativity. You can't think of anything more convenient? Please remember that desktop environments very rarely utilize a third dimension, something that humans have no problem perceiving in two-dimensional representation (painting, movie, etc.). There is work out there do be done, yet. Kudos, Mark Shuttleworth.
However to deny that some things are strictly wrong or inherently right invalidates the whole idea of value judgement and evaluation on a moral basis.
No, to deny an absolute scale of appropriateness regarding behavior would be to embrace the idea of evaluation on a moral basis. Now, I agree with you that you are not willing to accept that genocide is "right"--but that's your viewpoint man, and I'd like to let you know that you'd be in the minority in some places of the world. But you know what? It wouldn't make you wrong on some galactic ladder of moral correctness, because value judgments can only be made within the (inherently unique) contextual construct of a person's culture.
The hardest thing to accept about this perspective (and I admit it is but a single perspective, but I ask you just to try it on for size--you'll get your money back if dissatisfied) is that it means neither side of an argument is "right." It also means neither is "wrong," because right and wrong don't really exist outside of one's cultural construct.
To give a rough approximation of something the great Frank Herbert wrote: Reason is valuable only when applied to the wordless physical background of the universe.
Slashdot Mirror
OK that's interesting, but it doesn't help the problem of RSS feeds. I use Netvibes to manage my feeds, and I'll still see the entry in my feed, get pissed, click, and flame. Ah, the great circle of trolling.
Can't there be a third kind? I for one welcome our unemployed space alien migrant workers.
Uh... depends on your definition of "future," I guess. Microsoft is very much a lock-in company, and they're by far the most successful player in the personal computer market. So unless you're talking about monkeys writing Shakespeare, how can you say that Apple (or OS X) is doomed?
FSJ, is that you? ;)
I do this routinely, whether exchanging papers with colleagues or submitting resumes. It has to do with the philosophy that I will not give you easy editing privileges on something that I created; a PDF, while alterable, still feels more like a sealed envelope to me than a blank postcard like a
If you remove the typo from your query, then the results are perfectly matched: 1,140,000 hits both for "XP less secure than Vista" and "Vista less secure than XP."
www.empornium.us High quality torrents for the pr0n connoisseur.
Thank you for realizing this. Gmail's numbers are at least actual people. My e-mail addresses have NEVER seen spam from a Gmail address, but I've seen hoards from Yahoo alone. Please don't swallow those inflated statistics without choking.
Very well said, but I think the reason the name is witty is because of the highly publicized (in academic literature, anyway) divide between IRL speech and IM-speak, or 1337 sp33k. I personally have been so socially inept as to say things like "IRL" IRL. I think that's what the Gaim--er, Pidgin guys were getting at.
More likely IMO is that China would continue to use ODF for all its internal documentation, which constitutes the vast majority of paperwork produced by any organization. This way they are guaranteed access to their own documents into the future, without being trapped into having to deal with a company to access certain closed formats.
As a wise poster above said, my decisions are not subject to your value judgments. Your inability to perceive a difference (a) does not mean the difference isn't there, and (b) does not mean I cannot perceive it.
Users can indeed have both, but they needn't pay. I for on keep Thunderbird installed on my laptop, and I store *all* my e-mail there. This is so I have access to my e-mail even in offline situations. Of course, because (theoretically) one can't always have a laptop handy, webmail is still a must. Both my Gmail and my university e-mail addresses support webmail access, and both also have POP access via Thunderbird.
So yes, one can indeed have the best of both worlds.
"I ain't sayin' she's a--" ahhhh, nevermind. =)
I don't mean to troll, but I think your impression would benefit from changing it to "zuh Germans." As a phonetic sample, "zuh" in this regard is much more highly attested than "zee."
Happy Kraut bashing! =)
There's no excuse to exclude these open source formats unless Apple is trying to maintain utter control over the information being swapped between their products. I'm not trolling here; I'm typing this on a Macbook Pro. But I think it's pretty universal knowledge the Apple loves closed systems. This is just another realization of that.
I think the issue is that the hardware likely will not be "linux-capable," as it is unlikely that every component will be open. This is the motivation to pressure Dell into adding a Linux certification: it means hardware manufacturers will have to start considering opening up there hardware.
If you're happy with the crapware/reformat method, you're just asking for things to stay the same, or worse, become even more closed. I for one will never welcome closed-hardware overlords, and I'm going to bitch about it and boycott wherever necessary in order to make sure my opinion is understood by the companies responsible.
That's true, it definitely can't sync with everything yet, which is the biggest obstacle to its adoption. For anyone who's interested, though, I recently found a tool for iCal and GCal: http://blog.spanningsync.com/ Automatically backs up your calendars in case of corruption, but I have been syncing two ways, seamlessly, for weeks now. One step closer!
I found this line rather stunning the first time I read it, in Norman's "The Design Of Everyday Things." For an expert on human-machine interaction, one would think he'd have a better grasp on the overriding sentiment that is, as you've said, "Stupid computer!"
I actually expect search and metadata (aka Spotlight) to take us further than 3D spinning virtual worlds...
Why not integrate the two? Sure, it's faster to click on Fred's from an alphabetical list, but why confuse the access method with the organization? That is, one should be able to input (whether by text or speech or, hell, thought) "Fred" and go right to his desk; but beside him, should there be people with alphabetically proximal names? I hardly think that'd be useful!
Look up "barber shop" in the yellow pages. You'll find what you need alphabetically, then can head to it using the address given. But when you arrive on the site, where are the other barber shops? They would all have dissimilar names ("Tim's," "Joe's," etc.), but it makes sense to have them filed together. In irreal spaces, this is possible. In fact, the user should be able to decide how access method relates to organization (though a sane default scheme should of course be decided upon).
So I embrace the idea of physical metaphors; learning happens through metaphor, and a lot of our most basic mental constructs are based on our perceptions of physical reality. And as for scrolling through text on a page as being the only way to read electronically, I nearly laugh at your lack of creativity. You can't think of anything more convenient? Please remember that desktop environments very rarely utilize a third dimension, something that humans have no problem perceiving in two-dimensional representation (painting, movie, etc.). There is work out there do be done, yet. Kudos, Mark Shuttleworth.
However to deny that some things are strictly wrong or inherently right invalidates the whole idea of value judgement and evaluation on a moral basis.
No, to deny an absolute scale of appropriateness regarding behavior would be to embrace the idea of evaluation on a moral basis. Now, I agree with you that you are not willing to accept that genocide is "right"--but that's your viewpoint man, and I'd like to let you know that you'd be in the minority in some places of the world. But you know what? It wouldn't make you wrong on some galactic ladder of moral correctness, because value judgments can only be made within the (inherently unique) contextual construct of a person's culture.
The hardest thing to accept about this perspective (and I admit it is but a single perspective, but I ask you just to try it on for size--you'll get your money back if dissatisfied) is that it means neither side of an argument is "right." It also means neither is "wrong," because right and wrong don't really exist outside of one's cultural construct.
To give a rough approximation of something the great Frank Herbert wrote: Reason is valuable only when applied to the wordless physical background of the universe.