I used Windows 98 until around 2002 and it worked fine for me. I supported Windows NT, 2000, and XP at work with no problems during that time. I don't feel the need to try and prove something by always having the latest of everything.
Well, I'm certainly in a position to download MS betas if I want to, but I usually don't really feel any interest in doing so. And I know there will always be teething issues for the first few months of any MS OS, so why should I waste my time putting up with them?
Trying to force a tablet UI on a general purpose machine like a laptop or desktop is just as bad as trying to use a desktop OS on a tablet. Microsoft are pretty much ensuring that no matter what you try to use Windows 8 on, you get the worst of both worlds..
Left behind by what, exactly? I'm sure it's pretty simple to figure out, but that doesn't mean you need to put up with it when there are better alternatives available. I was wary of Vista when it came out, and likewise wary of 7. I switched to 7 at the end of last year when it had shown to be acceptable.
Well, people have been demonising saturated fat for no scientific reason for about 60 years, so at this point in time I wouldn't be that surprised that other things are being believed or overlooked for the wrong reasons.
Well for one thing, I hope nobody else starts copying Monsanto's specific roundup-resistant GMO strain, since there was an article recently showing that both the GMO strain and roundup itself cause cancer.. so it would make sense to stop anyone else from copying it.
It sounds like you live in a big city, which might explain why you don't appreciate how amazing the night sky can be. If someone were to try and destroy the night sky for every fucking person on the planet, I'd consider that a legitimate reason to end their existence. I think that most people on the planet would be happy to pay a penny towards hiring an assassin to make sure that it didn't happen.
And what exactly is "harmful" about targeted ads? Especially since they can be adblocked. Though FB are also gradually changing the "pages" stuff to monetize it more too, which does start to get annoying. Still nowhere near "harmful" though..
I wasn't saying that desktops/laptops are declining (though they probably are in the home market as you say), just the reliance on Windows is. I recently got one of my bosses a Mac. Several people told me he'd hate it, yada yada, but I was fed up of him owning his machines by falling for every pop up and spam mail he gets. At least with the Mac it'll take him a while to figure out how to wreck it. Turns out that he quite likes it too, despite being something like 85 and traditionally afraid of interface change.
This only became possible because AutoCAD became available for Mac again, but it shows how things are changing. Windows on the desktop is definitely becoming less relevant, even in business.
Windows on the desktop is becoming more irrelevant, and Windows Phone have been irrelevant for a long time. Let MS continue to strangle themselves if they will. It's just another plus to me.
I don't really see people accepting lock-in of the type you describe on the desktop. It's not really a big limiting factor on phones, but a lot of people use Android anyway, and I'm seeing a lot more anti-iPhone sentiment online these days (in memes and funny pictures made by people who are obviously just as stupid as people who choose to use iOS).
Anyway, I think there will always be options for those of us that don't want lock-in. For those that don't really care, at least they are less likely to have their machines infected. I think that's a big positive too.
Well, he's the one that brought in the Unix base for their OSes. Then even if he didn't design anything in the software or hardware himself, he's the one that chose the good designs and tossed out the ideas he didn't like. He had decent taste at least.
Thinking back to the Mac OS days in the 80s and early 90s, Macs were nicer looking and often nicer to use than Windows, Amiga Workbench, Acorns, Ataris, etc. At least some of that must have been Steve himself.
Things were shit until the iPhone came out. Before then, Windows Mobile was the best phone OS, and that says a lot. I've never actually wanted an iPhone. I stuck with Windows Mobile until Android 2.x devices were coming out, but all the competition between Android and iOS has been great. I don't know how things would have turned out if the iPod and iPhone didn't come out, but I don't think things would have been as good yet. We'd still be getting tech focused devices rather than experience focused. Don't get me wrong, I love customisation and still prefer Linux to OSX for example, but I lean towards the Mint end of the scale than Gentoo and all that. I used Ubuntu until they Unified it..
He was great at directing design as well as being a CEO. Even if he was copying a lot of the time, he's still the one that put this stuff into the mainstream, and ensured that everything was done to a pretty good standard.
You are an idiot. I don't like the guy, or a lot of the stuff he did, but it's obvious that he did a hell of a lot. I'm happy with how he's changed things, if only because now we have phones and tablets that are actually a pleasure to use, rather than a pointless attempt at recreating desktop OSes on a tiny screen.
It's kinda cool, but definitely not any more mindblowing than getting video of a man on the moon.. especially since our computing and telecommunications prowess is (or at least, should be) a lot more advanced these days.
That's more of a cost thing than a technology thing. That rich billionaire twat survived his Ferrari Enzo taking off and hitting a telegraph pole at 200mph or something silly like that. Race drivers can survive crashes because they have roll cages. Most people don't buy a car that can withstand that kind of problem. And again, at 1000mph unless you have a LOT of space for your magical new invention to slow you down in before you hit something, you're going to die. Even if you eject in a big, impervious inflatable ball and roll along the ground the g-forces from rotating would probably kill you. The only real thing I see being any use is an ejector seat, though for that you have to have the vehicle facing upright, and at 1000mph in an accident the chances of you being upright for long aren't very high..
Have there been double-blind tests for that? It sounds quite likely to be a placebo effect if both have the same amount of nutrients (though it sounds like they may not, but nobody has given details so far..).
I wouldn't. These things are about the least safe type of vehicle you can be in. I think I'd rather take my chances riding a rocket into orbit. At least then you only have to worry about the rocket itself blowing up, there's no need to worry about miniscule bumps in the road or the wheels/bearings melting.
If you lose stability and take off or roll at 1000mph, you're simply going to die, and no amount of roll cages, airbags and what-have-you are going to help. These guys risk their lives in the same way that a test pilot does, though in fact I'd say the risk is a lot worse. They don't have the option of ejecting (that I'm aware of).
And you think these buses would be doing 1000mph? On wheels which will basically melt through any rubber on them or need their bearings replaced every few miles? You'd be far better off with something like a maglev train.
Slashdot Mirror
I used Windows 98 until around 2002 and it worked fine for me. I supported Windows NT, 2000, and XP at work with no problems during that time. I don't feel the need to try and prove something by always having the latest of everything.
Well, I'm certainly in a position to download MS betas if I want to, but I usually don't really feel any interest in doing so. And I know there will always be teething issues for the first few months of any MS OS, so why should I waste my time putting up with them?
Trying to force a tablet UI on a general purpose machine like a laptop or desktop is just as bad as trying to use a desktop OS on a tablet. Microsoft are pretty much ensuring that no matter what you try to use Windows 8 on, you get the worst of both worlds..
Left behind by what, exactly? I'm sure it's pretty simple to figure out, but that doesn't mean you need to put up with it when there are better alternatives available. I was wary of Vista when it came out, and likewise wary of 7. I switched to 7 at the end of last year when it had shown to be acceptable.
Just in case:
joke
Noun:
A thing that someone says to cause amusement or laughter, esp. a story with a funny punchline.
Well, people have been demonising saturated fat for no scientific reason for about 60 years, so at this point in time I wouldn't be that surprised that other things are being believed or overlooked for the wrong reasons.
I'm not opposed to the idea in general, but if the study is valid then Monsanto are going about it the wrong way.
For further context, we were making a repetitive joke.
Well for one thing, I hope nobody else starts copying Monsanto's specific roundup-resistant GMO strain, since there was an article recently showing that both the GMO strain and roundup itself cause cancer.. so it would make sense to stop anyone else from copying it.
For further context, "comes" is in this case a double entendre implying both physical arrival, and ejaculation/orgasm.
A large portion of the nutrition is lost in the first few hours after things are picked
Citation, please?
It sounds like you live in a big city, which might explain why you don't appreciate how amazing the night sky can be. If someone were to try and destroy the night sky for every fucking person on the planet, I'd consider that a legitimate reason to end their existence. I think that most people on the planet would be happy to pay a penny towards hiring an assassin to make sure that it didn't happen.
And what exactly is "harmful" about targeted ads? Especially since they can be adblocked. Though FB are also gradually changing the "pages" stuff to monetize it more too, which does start to get annoying. Still nowhere near "harmful" though..
I found it cool back then. Breaking the sound barrier in a car felt like some kind of achievement for humanity. This just feels like more of the same.
I wasn't saying that desktops/laptops are declining (though they probably are in the home market as you say), just the reliance on Windows is. I recently got one of my bosses a Mac. Several people told me he'd hate it, yada yada, but I was fed up of him owning his machines by falling for every pop up and spam mail he gets. At least with the Mac it'll take him a while to figure out how to wreck it. Turns out that he quite likes it too, despite being something like 85 and traditionally afraid of interface change.
This only became possible because AutoCAD became available for Mac again, but it shows how things are changing. Windows on the desktop is definitely becoming less relevant, even in business.
Windows on the desktop is becoming more irrelevant, and Windows Phone have been irrelevant for a long time. Let MS continue to strangle themselves if they will. It's just another plus to me.
I don't really see people accepting lock-in of the type you describe on the desktop. It's not really a big limiting factor on phones, but a lot of people use Android anyway, and I'm seeing a lot more anti-iPhone sentiment online these days (in memes and funny pictures made by people who are obviously just as stupid as people who choose to use iOS).
Anyway, I think there will always be options for those of us that don't want lock-in. For those that don't really care, at least they are less likely to have their machines infected. I think that's a big positive too.
Well, he's the one that brought in the Unix base for their OSes. Then even if he didn't design anything in the software or hardware himself, he's the one that chose the good designs and tossed out the ideas he didn't like. He had decent taste at least.
Thinking back to the Mac OS days in the 80s and early 90s, Macs were nicer looking and often nicer to use than Windows, Amiga Workbench, Acorns, Ataris, etc. At least some of that must have been Steve himself.
Things were shit until the iPhone came out. Before then, Windows Mobile was the best phone OS, and that says a lot. I've never actually wanted an iPhone. I stuck with Windows Mobile until Android 2.x devices were coming out, but all the competition between Android and iOS has been great. I don't know how things would have turned out if the iPod and iPhone didn't come out, but I don't think things would have been as good yet. We'd still be getting tech focused devices rather than experience focused. Don't get me wrong, I love customisation and still prefer Linux to OSX for example, but I lean towards the Mint end of the scale than Gentoo and all that. I used Ubuntu until they Unified it..
He was great at directing design as well as being a CEO. Even if he was copying a lot of the time, he's still the one that put this stuff into the mainstream, and ensured that everything was done to a pretty good standard.
What did he really do, other than be a CEO?
You are an idiot. I don't like the guy, or a lot of the stuff he did, but it's obvious that he did a hell of a lot. I'm happy with how he's changed things, if only because now we have phones and tablets that are actually a pleasure to use, rather than a pointless attempt at recreating desktop OSes on a tiny screen.
It's kinda cool, but definitely not any more mindblowing than getting video of a man on the moon.. especially since our computing and telecommunications prowess is (or at least, should be) a lot more advanced these days.
That's more of a cost thing than a technology thing. That rich billionaire twat survived his Ferrari Enzo taking off and hitting a telegraph pole at 200mph or something silly like that. Race drivers can survive crashes because they have roll cages. Most people don't buy a car that can withstand that kind of problem. And again, at 1000mph unless you have a LOT of space for your magical new invention to slow you down in before you hit something, you're going to die. Even if you eject in a big, impervious inflatable ball and roll along the ground the g-forces from rotating would probably kill you. The only real thing I see being any use is an ejector seat, though for that you have to have the vehicle facing upright, and at 1000mph in an accident the chances of you being upright for long aren't very high..
Have there been double-blind tests for that? It sounds quite likely to be a placebo effect if both have the same amount of nutrients (though it sounds like they may not, but nobody has given details so far..).
I wouldn't. These things are about the least safe type of vehicle you can be in. I think I'd rather take my chances riding a rocket into orbit. At least then you only have to worry about the rocket itself blowing up, there's no need to worry about miniscule bumps in the road or the wheels/bearings melting.
If you lose stability and take off or roll at 1000mph, you're simply going to die, and no amount of roll cages, airbags and what-have-you are going to help. These guys risk their lives in the same way that a test pilot does, though in fact I'd say the risk is a lot worse. They don't have the option of ejecting (that I'm aware of).
And you think these buses would be doing 1000mph? On wheels which will basically melt through any rubber on them or need their bearings replaced every few miles? You'd be far better off with something like a maglev train.