Funny thing is, one of the reasons I want an Android phone (besides the obvious openness) is that I can load the Last.FM player and listen to music... without requiring a separate device.
I think you are referring to cost of living? I'll agree, has gone down with the use of technology, but I don't attribute that to wealth. It's not like we have more rich people. We just have more people who can afford plumbing, big screen televisions, etc because they are getting cheaper to make.
Right after the business lunch and right before a business dinner. I think that's what you meant. Of course, the morning is the same. Business breakfast, the two hour meeting, then the business lunch.;)
Yes it does... the downside of course is having all your developers in different timezones. We have to schedule Scrum meetings for just before lunch to review our previous day. Those of us on the East coast have to differentiate between the work we did in the morning and the work we did yesterday. Since it's all virtual, someone came up with an Excel sheet to put all the work items in and it's over thought (giving the average amount of hours per day of work you have to work with then accounting for all of them...)
Wealth is a zero sum game. Not everyone can be wealthy. Period. If someone else takes all your candles, you could be left with no candle to light while he has a billion candles that you could be burning. (I assume you are talking about lighting a candle as if you were spending money.)
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but to say wealth isn't zero-sum is wrong (Unless you work for the US treasury and you are making new candles out of thin air causing all other candles to be less impressive.)
I think you're trying to be funny, but in a way... those that believe that we were created and all people are unique/beautiful will generally breed with like minded folks and in time it could breed out the traits that make us "good looking."
In a way, yes, but general medical procedures only change the "skin" of your body. They don't automatically mean your children will look like you. In the case of laser eye surgery... the same thing applies. Now instead of bad eyesight being a turn off (or a method for natural selection) it is artificially corrected and the person with the malformed eyes has tendency to pass that along to their children who will also need the surgery (or glasses) to see. We are merely breading ourselves into deformed wrecks by patching our defects instead of selecting mates based on them. It's become "incorrect" (and illegal) in our society to be discriminative.
I don't know about that... I grew up fairly skinny, didn't eat well, but I was 6'2" leaving high school and I've stopped growing even though I eat better now. I think nutrition might be a factor to a specific genetic growth band, but I can't believe it has anything to do with it than that. (ie: you couldn't feed a dwarf the best food on earth to reverse his genetic tendency to being short.)
To them, having kids is a right, not a privilege. I know it sounds rather mean to say that, but if you can't afford kids, you shouldn't be having them. Unfortunately, today's society is under the belief that we should be privileged to things that we cannot afford on our own (kids, health care, big homes, fancy cars, land, electricity, shelter...) and someone should have to pay for it since they can't.
The teachers who ordered us to use script justified it by saying that, once we got out into the real world, everything would have to be in script, lest we appear unprofessional.
Yep, my RX8 could hit 150mph (240 kph) easily. 161 kph (100mph) is hardly outperforming. I realize that most people don't generally drive that fast, but if we are going to compare specs, we should be able to hit the same speeds even if they are dangerous.
Oh, and it should cost roughly the same (~$30k) for that performance.;)
I'm sure he's translating between Iceweasel and Firefox properly... I'm still kind of disappointed that they haven't upgrade IW to 3.5 though.
On another note, if you want bleeding edge (without rolling your own), it looks like Arch is where it's at? I was thinking about switching from Debian to Arch and this data is intriguing to me.
HyperV is distributed for free with every Server Professional (right?) so if they can get the world to run their server and put Linux in VMs under it, they have control of the VM. Now, big corporations see this as a point of sale. Look, we can run our Linux servers on this Windows machine instead of another Linux machine, this VM is pre-installed and free! Microsoft releases or markets HyperV as a faster more reliable solution (even if it isn't) and they convince the corporate types that only trust big M because they use them so widely already. "Let's make our next server a Windows box..." This continues for a few years. MS plays nice and people think all is well. Open projects start to lose interest and support, companies start relying more and more on HyperV. Then MS sneaks in a virtual machine side compatibility patch that makes Linux start to run slower and slower. You won't be able to see this because HyperV isn't open. And all those other VMs that were competing with HyperV before have fallen behind and can't keep up. MS starts sending out comparisons of their OS running in a their modified VM comparing it to Linux running in their VM. Bloggers/Websites eat that up and soon enough, it's on the front page of Slashdot. "Windows runs better in VMs than Linux."
Call it a conspiracy theory if you like, but you couldn't prove one way or another without seeing Microsoft's code... and that's not happening.
As with all social experiments, the majority is usually the first to dominate a story. Slowly, the majority (even here) is being replaced by Microsoft fans.
I wish meta moderating was allowed inline so whoever modded it troll could be properly penalized by other mods for abuse.
So that's, what, eight years ago? [...] maybe it's time to kiss and make up?
If Jeffrey Dahmer was still alive and invited you over to lunch, would you go?;)
He did things to other people that wouldn't be considered the best interest to society and Microsoft did things to competitors that wouldn't be in the best interest of the market. They both screwed up in the past, have pretended to be nice and stabbed the person they were being nice to in the back (... literally) and you want to pretend none of it happened? You want to pretend that they've changed and aren't out to kill off their competitors?
Yep, I think that's the crux of it. It's a point of control. If they can remain the closest to the hardware, they control the system no matter what's running on it. If they can get Linux to run under Windows and they successfully outpace other VMs, then they can start adding "compatibility" code and making Linux perform worse than Windows Virtual systems.
It's also well documented that Microsoft would rather give away their technology to get people using it than let people use a competitor.
I just right click pretty much anywhere and hit Firefox. Openbox is wonderful. I don't need to worry about pinning, plopping or any of that.;) [though I will admit that it took a minute or two of my life to get it setup right, but now that's out of the way...]
And since Microsoft already tried it and failed, all other attempts should be squashed... because Microsoft is the epitome of efficiency and speed and therefore cannot be beat!
Then create a web like experience on the desktop... What are you going to lose? You might have to create a new tag for application space like current window managers have (or use Object tags?), but otherwise the framework is there. Links to your favorite applications in a menu along the top, side, or bottom of the "page" with the ability to do a search of your hard drive as if it were a site on the web.
As far as applications running in the background, Google has proven that you can run IM in the browser alongside weather widgets and other things with tabs and all. (Customize your Google Homepage) A web server for a single client is really not that machine intensive, if you even have to run it since the "browser WM" would be opening local files and have no need to translate URLs. And lets say you want to see what your server application is doing... <img src="~/.desktop/display/myServer/status.png" onLoad="myTheme.bindUpdate(this, 'app.myServer.statusUpdate')"/> (if onLoad was added as an event of course...)
I think you've just defined why a Microsoft majority market share is monopolistic... Change anything in your computer to another company and it will work great. Change the OS and you won't be able to run your stuff... and this isn't Apple/Linux' fault. I dare you to find a licensing cost for win32 and DirectX so that other software vendors can utilize them in their OS.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny thing is, one of the reasons I want an Android phone (besides the obvious openness) is that I can load the Last.FM player and listen to music... without requiring a separate device.
I think you are referring to cost of living? I'll agree, has gone down with the use of technology, but I don't attribute that to wealth. It's not like we have more rich people. We just have more people who can afford plumbing, big screen televisions, etc because they are getting cheaper to make.
Right after the business lunch and right before a business dinner. I think that's what you meant. Of course, the morning is the same. Business breakfast, the two hour meeting, then the business lunch. ;)
Yes it does... the downside of course is having all your developers in different timezones. We have to schedule Scrum meetings for just before lunch to review our previous day. Those of us on the East coast have to differentiate between the work we did in the morning and the work we did yesterday. Since it's all virtual, someone came up with an Excel sheet to put all the work items in and it's over thought (giving the average amount of hours per day of work you have to work with then accounting for all of them...)
If I were self-employed, I'm afraid I might only hire the lazy git.
Wealth is a zero sum game. Not everyone can be wealthy. Period. If someone else takes all your candles, you could be left with no candle to light while he has a billion candles that you could be burning. (I assume you are talking about lighting a candle as if you were spending money.)
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but to say wealth isn't zero-sum is wrong (Unless you work for the US treasury and you are making new candles out of thin air causing all other candles to be less impressive.)
Have you ever heard of IE6?
I think you're trying to be funny, but in a way... those that believe that we were created and all people are unique/beautiful will generally breed with like minded folks and in time it could breed out the traits that make us "good looking."
In a way, yes, but general medical procedures only change the "skin" of your body. They don't automatically mean your children will look like you. In the case of laser eye surgery... the same thing applies. Now instead of bad eyesight being a turn off (or a method for natural selection) it is artificially corrected and the person with the malformed eyes has tendency to pass that along to their children who will also need the surgery (or glasses) to see. We are merely breading ourselves into deformed wrecks by patching our defects instead of selecting mates based on them. It's become "incorrect" (and illegal) in our society to be discriminative.
I don't know about that... I grew up fairly skinny, didn't eat well, but I was 6'2" leaving high school and I've stopped growing even though I eat better now. I think nutrition might be a factor to a specific genetic growth band, but I can't believe it has anything to do with it than that. (ie: you couldn't feed a dwarf the best food on earth to reverse his genetic tendency to being short.)
To them, having kids is a right, not a privilege. I know it sounds rather mean to say that, but if you can't afford kids, you shouldn't be having them. Unfortunately, today's society is under the belief that we should be privileged to things that we cannot afford on our own (kids, health care, big homes, fancy cars, land, electricity, shelter...) and someone should have to pay for it since they can't.
The teachers who ordered us to use script justified it by saying that, once we got out into the real world, everything would have to be in script, lest we appear unprofessional.
Ha. Ha.
They've never met an Architect, I assume. ;)
I'm not very shiny though...
That's mainly why I traded it for an MX5. ;) I get 35+ with that, but it can still top 100mph easily, so the argument still stands.
I did love that rotary even though the MPG sucked.
Yep, my RX8 could hit 150mph (240 kph) easily. 161 kph (100mph) is hardly outperforming. I realize that most people don't generally drive that fast, but if we are going to compare specs, we should be able to hit the same speeds even if they are dangerous.
Oh, and it should cost roughly the same (~$30k) for that performance. ;)
I'm sure he's translating between Iceweasel and Firefox properly... I'm still kind of disappointed that they haven't upgrade IW to 3.5 though.
On another note, if you want bleeding edge (without rolling your own), it looks like Arch is where it's at? I was thinking about switching from Debian to Arch and this data is intriguing to me.
It doesn't have to be about the driver code...
HyperV is distributed for free with every Server Professional (right?) so if they can get the world to run their server and put Linux in VMs under it, they have control of the VM. Now, big corporations see this as a point of sale. Look, we can run our Linux servers on this Windows machine instead of another Linux machine, this VM is pre-installed and free! Microsoft releases or markets HyperV as a faster more reliable solution (even if it isn't) and they convince the corporate types that only trust big M because they use them so widely already. "Let's make our next server a Windows box..." This continues for a few years. MS plays nice and people think all is well. Open projects start to lose interest and support, companies start relying more and more on HyperV. Then MS sneaks in a virtual machine side compatibility patch that makes Linux start to run slower and slower. You won't be able to see this because HyperV isn't open. And all those other VMs that were competing with HyperV before have fallen behind and can't keep up. MS starts sending out comparisons of their OS running in a their modified VM comparing it to Linux running in their VM. Bloggers/Websites eat that up and soon enough, it's on the front page of Slashdot. "Windows runs better in VMs than Linux."
Call it a conspiracy theory if you like, but you couldn't prove one way or another without seeing Microsoft's code... and that's not happening.
As with all social experiments, the majority is usually the first to dominate a story. Slowly, the majority (even here) is being replaced by Microsoft fans.
I wish meta moderating was allowed inline so whoever modded it troll could be properly penalized by other mods for abuse.
So that's, what, eight years ago? [...] maybe it's time to kiss and make up?
If Jeffrey Dahmer was still alive and invited you over to lunch, would you go? ;)
He did things to other people that wouldn't be considered the best interest to society and Microsoft did things to competitors that wouldn't be in the best interest of the market. They both screwed up in the past, have pretended to be nice and stabbed the person they were being nice to in the back (... literally) and you want to pretend none of it happened? You want to pretend that they've changed and aren't out to kill off their competitors?
Yep, I think that's the crux of it. It's a point of control. If they can remain the closest to the hardware, they control the system no matter what's running on it. If they can get Linux to run under Windows and they successfully outpace other VMs, then they can start adding "compatibility" code and making Linux perform worse than Windows Virtual systems.
It's also well documented that Microsoft would rather give away their technology to get people using it than let people use a competitor.
Personally, I don't see why an application is setting itself as the default anyway. That should be left up to the user and the OS.
I just right click pretty much anywhere and hit Firefox. Openbox is wonderful. I don't need to worry about pinning, plopping or any of that. ;)
[though I will admit that it took a minute or two of my life to get it setup right, but now that's out of the way...]
And since Microsoft already tried it and failed, all other attempts should be squashed... because Microsoft is the epitome of efficiency and speed and therefore cannot be beat!
Then create a web like experience on the desktop... What are you going to lose? You might have to create a new tag for application space like current window managers have (or use Object tags?), but otherwise the framework is there. Links to your favorite applications in a menu along the top, side, or bottom of the "page" with the ability to do a search of your hard drive as if it were a site on the web.
As far as applications running in the background, Google has proven that you can run IM in the browser alongside weather widgets and other things with tabs and all. (Customize your Google Homepage) A web server for a single client is really not that machine intensive, if you even have to run it since the "browser WM" would be opening local files and have no need to translate URLs. And lets say you want to see what your server application is doing... <img src="~/.desktop/display/myServer/status.png" onLoad="myTheme.bindUpdate(this, 'app.myServer.statusUpdate')" /> (if onLoad was added as an event of course...)
I think you've just defined why a Microsoft majority market share is monopolistic... Change anything in your computer to another company and it will work great. Change the OS and you won't be able to run your stuff... and this isn't Apple/Linux' fault. I dare you to find a licensing cost for win32 and DirectX so that other software vendors can utilize them in their OS.