Go ahead and try to name an actual application that "is supported on Windows but has less support, or lower performance, or doesn't work at all, on the other operating systems "
Navision Quickbooks Outlook "Bluray playback including BD+" Filemaker Pro Cadex Battery Analyser Medmont Studio (optical topography) iQmetrix RQ4 (cellular industry specific point of sale) Compulink Advantage EHR (electronic health records) TopCon ScanMaster (3D spatial capture) Advance Medical FocalPoints (contact lens design, point of sale, and manufacturing lathe control) Motorola CPS/RSS/etc (Two-way radio programming software to setup police/fire/emergency response radio systems for example)
And thousands more.
There are no 'better alternatives' in the OSS domain. In several cases there is no alternative at all.
Linux has some large gaps. For the home consumer it won't run itunes, and isn't great for the kids new ipod touch and the selection of games is a lot weaker. For the generic office types the accounting, powerpoint, and outlook options are weak.
OpenOffice is fine if you are just handling internal documents, or plaintext, but if you are exchanging heavily formatted word or excel sheets with external sources, you need Word and Excel too.
Finally, as the list above demonstrates, as soon as you get into anything really specialized or industry specific or tied to specialized hardware your options are extremely limited, and windows is routinely the only option.
A mistake is a miscalculation or a failure to properly execute a choice.
The dictionary would disagree with you:
1. An error or fault resulting from defective judgment, deficient knowledge, or carelessness.
Don't like that one? Another dictionary also disagrees with you.
1. an error or blunder in action, opinion, or judgment
And those are both the -first- definitions, not some obscure obsolete slang reading.
One doesn't mistakenly give someone else a blow job.
It may be or may not be an error in judement depending on the circumstances. If it was an error in judgement, then it was a mistake. I'm not sure why you are fixating on the semantics of "mistake".
Most women know when a man is interested. There are many reasons to deny it.
So I should avoid taking sociological studies at face value and instead place them secondary to opinions you apparently pull out of your ass instead?
I can assure you I've been completely blind to women being interested in me in a number of cases. In that they told me years later and I had completely missed it. But hey, if you say 'most women know and are just lying about it' then that should be good enough.
People choose to cheat. If someone is tempted it means that he or she is not getting their needs met. That is what makes the affair appealing.
Anyone who thinks a marriage never has any rough spots is deluding themselves. You can assume there will be times when one partner or the other is going to not be having their needs met.
If it were not facebook if someone is miserable they will cheat or leave you anyway
If they don't have an easy outlet to cheat, their is a better chance of remaining faithful while the marriage fixes itself.
We all are human and when times are tough we think back about exes and other people. When things are good in a relationship your desire to flirt to fantasize go down.
If you are on a diet, and you are full, you won't snack. When you get hungry you will be tempted; its a lot easier to stay on the diet though the hungry times if you don't have a bowl of candy sitting next to you.
There's a huge fucking difference between failing yourself, and failing another human being. Especially one that you claim to care deeply about. How can you even consider making that comparison?
Ultimately the importance of honoring your commitment to someone else boils down to the importance to yourself of honoring that commitment to someone else.
You can't let someone else down, without letting yourself down. So the comparison is apt. You can't respect others without respecting yourself; and conversely, if you can't respect yourself you can't respect others.
She didn't make "a mistake", she made a series of choices.
So you agree with me. Unless you think a mistake is anything more complicated than making the 'wrong choice'.
People make wrong choices, even when they are trying not to. That is what is a mistake is.
Calling them choices doesn't change anything.
- and certainly not one that she knows is interested in her.
A recent study showed that the vast majority of women had no idea the guys they were just friends with were interested in something more with them. People have blind spots. Big ones. Lots of them.
People can also be manipulated and influenced. You think we'd spend billions of dollars on advertising if we couldn't be?
. Her needs and his needs should be met and the temptation to cheat goes down. That simple.
You probably have never tripped either - I mean you don't want to trip, and you just have to look where you are going. Its that simple.
And yet we all fall down.
You think you can go decades on end and meet someone elses needs the whole time? You can try. You should try. But if you think success is gauranteed just because you tried you've got a wake up call coming your way sooner or later.
The reality is either that person is a whore (it happens)
Yes, everyone who has ever cheated is either with a terrible person or they are a whore. Nothing in life is ever more complicated than that.
Hypothetically... Suppose her husband spent the last 8 months in afghanistan and was still there now, her car broke down, and her neighbor who always had a secret crush on her rescued her, then invited her over for coffee she felt obligated due to the rescue, he was charming, then dinners what reason could she decline without being rude -- they were neighbors and she was eating alone... he created a relationship that started neighborly and then changed course... she was lonely, flattered, and then he seduces her one night after too much wine and provocative conversation, and she immediately regretted it horribly, throws up when she thinks about it or bursts into spontaneous tears of self loathing.
She's not a normal imperfect human who made a mistake; she's just a whore.
Or you could instead say that its facilitating the catching of cheating rats.
A large number of people do not 'set out to cheat', but if you put them in an environment that facilitates it they may stray in a moment of weakness, often regretted, but which can't be undone.
If your married and don't want to cheat you should avoid spending a lot of time alone with members of the opposite sex. Period. That includes on facebook.
Facebook is precisely the sort of place you shouldn't go. The constant bombardment of people you used to know, or sort of know coupled with natural human curiosity, and the false sense of security one has from being 'its only online' I'm safely at home.
And suddenly your chatting up an ex, and keeping it secret because your spouse would be pissed, and then they want to meet for coffee and you keep that secret too, and besides its just a friend... and they have feelings for you, and its kind of flattering, and you know its wrong but its kind of exciting... and then you've done something you regret.
And of course the evidence is all over facebook for your spouse to find out about one day when you forgot to logout; if the STD you brought home doesn't give you away first.
Point reiterated -- a lot of people don't intend to cheat, but if they are in a situation where they end up having a secret relationship with a member of the opposite sex... its definitely going to happen sometimes. And facebook is a prime breeding ground for (re)kindling those sorts of relationships.
If you want to avoid it, stay off facebook entirely, or have a joint family account instead of a personal one. If your going to tempt fate by chatting with an ex, having your spouse sit in definitely puts a wet blanket on any sparks...
I haven't used my 360 or Wii for years, because there aren't any exclusive games out for them that really interest me.
I've got 2 kids under 10, the Wii never goes 2 days in a row without being turned on.
I've got a PC hooked up to the TV, steam with 100 titles, MAME, another dozen classics from GoG, and some humble bundles. Wireless xbox controller, keyboard, mouse, and joystick.
They barely touch it in comparison.
The 'hardcore' consoles are facing stiff competition from the PC, due to the fact that the advance of technology has somewhat levelled off and you can get a VERY competent PC inexpensively and it will last years without needing upgrades. And its fine for single player games, does the internet, and is overall a lot more flexible. Games tend to be cheaper, with free mods, etc, etc.
But the Wii... and WiiU... they're really in a different market entirely. My kids aren't getting a smartphone anytime soon either. They each have a 3DS. Nintendo is safe for the near future.
It should also be noted that, in case it wasn't already obvious, HTC is much smaller than Samsung in the mobile space. It thus would not be hypocritical or illogical for Apple to be able to assert that Samsung caused irreparable harm while HTC did not
That's fair, but things do get a bit weird when something is 'for sale' to one customer but not to another. Its ok to negotiate different prices for different customers... but to tell one customer the product isn't for sale to them at any price can get one in trouble, especially if you are in a monopoly position -- which is precisely what a patent grants the holder.
. Fracking is simply the equivalent to swirling the straw around the bottom of the cup, trying to suck up the last dribbles of milkshake. If you have to frack, the well is dry.
Its more like easting the last buffalo, picking at the bones, worrying about starving, and then realizing you can eat insects.
Fracking is eating the insects. You might think your scraping the bottom of the barrel, but in truth you've just opened a MUCH bigger barrel. There is more biomass in insects than there ever was in buffalo... even before you started eating them.
Why would it matter to Samsung if the deal between Apple and HTC concerns some patents that are in dispute?
Apple has alleged that Samsung has caused them 'irreparable harm' by violating their patents, and has requested (and in somes cases gotten) injunctions against Samsung products in several cases now.
Samsungs counter argument is essentially:
(disputed assumption 1) Assuming your patents are valid, and (disputed assumption 2) Assuming we infringed those patents, then: its still not irreparable harm. Apple settled with HTC on those same patents which suggests that infringing those patents isn't irreparable, and that money can 'repair' the harm after all, and that therefore an injunction isn't needed.
Of course its all moot if Samsung is able to get assumption 1 or 2 invalidated, but they're fighting this case at every level.
If by diversity you mean race and gender, you are wrong. Diversity in ideas is nice, but assuming that a black woman would think differently about an issue than a Chinese man is absurd. What if they both learned from the same book? They will likely have the same perspective.
On Ruby: likely. On life: not likely. On interacting with the audience: not likely.
Someone else pointed out: "If you are a white guy in china you'll likely be treated like a foreigner."
If your whole line up is one uniform group, then some of your audience is going to feel like a foreigner. Mix up the line up, and you'll connect with more of your audience.
Are you suggesting that the NBA needs to re-evaluate its scouting practices to make sure they're not discriminating?
Are you suggesting a conference lineup is somehow like an NBA team?
The NBA isn't looking for people with "different approaches to life" to make interesting presentations. That isn't even on the radar for them. They are looking for "top basketball players" and that's it.
It is perhaps somewhat interesting to notice who the audience for the NBA is. According to Wikipedia, according to neilson some 56% of African American men in S.F. tuned into the NBA playoffs on ABC in 2005. Care to guess how many Latino women watched it?
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to attend a presentation by the 10 best Ruby coders in the country. Especially if no consideration was made of their presenting abilities or personalities.
BTW, I notice you had to add "upper middle class", "silicon valley startup" to try to make your point. Isn't that racial stereotyping?
I did that to make the line up as homogenous as possible. I'd have made them all brothers who grew up in the same house, went to the same school, and then graduated and worked for the same company if that didn't stretch credibility past the breaking point.
You know, not all white males are upper middle class nor do all white males start silicon valley companies.
Of course I know that. But its pretty easy to put a conference together with just those as speakers.
There are rich white males, poor white males, lower middle class white males, white males who live and work in places far from Silicon Valley like Wisconsin, Florida, Washington D.C. Maine, Australia, Poland, Russia and, believe it or not, places like South Africa, Hong Kong, Japan, and Singapore, and some of them suffer from racial discrimination and ethnic profiling.
Yup, agreed 100%, but if I'm putting together a conference. I'm trying to be more inclusive than just 'all the different kinds of white guy', but yeah absolutely I'd try to get white speaker from South Africa rather than a clone from California.
But why do you feel the need to throw race into it?
There are some differences in how people treat you...
That's enough of a reason right there.
fore example walk around as a white guy in Asia and you'll be treated as a foreigner - sometimes that's good and sometimes that's bad
So if you went to a conference as a white guy hosted entirely by chinese men who treated you as a foreigner... ?
But these aren't differences that would be significant to a Ruby conference.
Giving all your audience that extra sense of inclusion and welcome so they connect better is significant regardless of the topic.
Some people will connect better with some speakers than others based on personality, background, gender, and yes, even race, and will take away more from the conference if they connect. The more diverse the lineup, including race, the more audience you'll reach.
Would having a black guy be a criteria for a Ruby conference? Hell no, but I would make an effort to invite a mix of good speakers.
Slashdot Mirror
Go ahead and try to name an actual application that "is supported on Windows but has less support, or lower performance, or doesn't work at all, on the other operating systems "
Navision
Quickbooks
Outlook
"Bluray playback including BD+"
Filemaker Pro
Cadex Battery Analyser
Medmont Studio (optical topography)
iQmetrix RQ4 (cellular industry specific point of sale)
Compulink Advantage EHR (electronic health records)
TopCon ScanMaster (3D spatial capture)
Advance Medical FocalPoints (contact lens design, point of sale, and manufacturing lathe control)
Motorola CPS/RSS/etc (Two-way radio programming software to setup police/fire/emergency response radio systems for example)
And thousands more.
There are no 'better alternatives' in the OSS domain. In several cases there is no alternative at all.
Linux has some large gaps. For the home consumer it won't run itunes, and isn't great for the kids new ipod touch and the selection of games is a lot weaker. For the generic office types the accounting, powerpoint, and outlook options are weak.
OpenOffice is fine if you are just handling internal documents, or plaintext, but if you are exchanging heavily formatted word or excel sheets with external sources, you need Word and Excel too.
Finally, as the list above demonstrates, as soon as you get into anything really specialized or industry specific or tied to specialized hardware your options are extremely limited, and windows is routinely the only option.
So all fat people don't respect anybody?
I hardly think you can argue that "all fat people" are fat because they let themselves down.
A mistake is a miscalculation or a failure to properly execute a choice.
The dictionary would disagree with you:
1. An error or fault resulting from defective judgment, deficient knowledge, or carelessness.
Don't like that one? Another dictionary also disagrees with you.
1. an error or blunder in action, opinion, or judgment
And those are both the -first- definitions, not some obscure obsolete slang reading.
One doesn't mistakenly give someone else a blow job.
It may be or may not be an error in judement depending on the circumstances. If it was an error in judgement, then it was a mistake. I'm not sure why you are fixating on the semantics of "mistake".
Most women know when a man is interested. There are many reasons to deny it.
So I should avoid taking sociological studies at face value and instead place them secondary to opinions you apparently pull out of your ass instead?
I can assure you I've been completely blind to women being interested in me in a number of cases. In that they told me years later and I had completely missed it. But hey, if you say 'most women know and are just lying about it' then that should be good enough.
People choose to cheat. If someone is tempted it means that he or she is not getting their needs met. That is what makes the affair appealing.
Anyone who thinks a marriage never has any rough spots is deluding themselves. You can assume there will be times when one partner or the other is going to not be having their needs met.
If it were not facebook if someone is miserable they will cheat or leave you anyway
If they don't have an easy outlet to cheat, their is a better chance of remaining faithful while the marriage fixes itself.
We all are human and when times are tough we think back about exes and other people. When things are good in a relationship your desire to flirt to fantasize go down.
If you are on a diet, and you are full, you won't snack. When you get hungry you will be tempted; its a lot easier to stay on the diet though the hungry times if you don't have a bowl of candy sitting next to you.
The problem is Blackberry are so far behind in the app race it is nearly impossible to catch up.
Apps are overrated. Most people don't buy many, and few really care which free apps they amuse themselves with when they are bored.
The number of high value apps that an app store really needs to have to be 'competitive' is in then 10s not the 10s of thousands.
Almost everyone is a whore then.
It's fine if you want to define it that way. Not terribly useful though.
There's a huge fucking difference between failing yourself, and failing another human being. Especially one that you claim to care deeply about. How can you even consider making that comparison?
Ultimately the importance of honoring your commitment to someone else boils down to the importance to yourself of honoring that commitment to someone else.
You can't let someone else down, without letting yourself down. So the comparison is apt. You can't respect others without respecting yourself; and conversely, if you can't respect yourself you can't respect others.
She didn't make "a mistake", she made a series of choices.
So you agree with me. Unless you think a mistake is anything more complicated than making the 'wrong choice'.
People make wrong choices, even when they are trying not to. That is what is a mistake is.
Calling them choices doesn't change anything.
- and certainly not one that she knows is interested in her.
A recent study showed that the vast majority of women had no idea the guys they were just friends with were interested in something more with them. People have blind spots. Big ones. Lots of them.
People can also be manipulated and influenced. You think we'd spend billions of dollars on advertising if we couldn't be?
. Her needs and his needs should be met and the temptation to cheat goes down. That simple.
You probably have never tripped either - I mean you don't want to trip, and you just have to look where you are going. Its that simple.
And yet we all fall down.
You think you can go decades on end and meet someone elses needs the whole time? You can try. You should try. But if you think success is gauranteed just because you tried you've got a wake up call coming your way sooner or later.
The reality is either that person is a whore (it happens)
Yes, everyone who has ever cheated is either with a terrible person or they are a whore. Nothing in life is ever more complicated than that.
Hypothetically... Suppose her husband spent the last 8 months in afghanistan and was still there now, her car broke down, and her neighbor who always had a secret crush on her rescued her, then invited her over for coffee she felt obligated due to the rescue, he was charming, then dinners what reason could she decline without being rude -- they were neighbors and she was eating alone... he created a relationship that started neighborly and then changed course... she was lonely, flattered, and then he seduces her one night after too much wine and provocative conversation, and she immediately regretted it horribly, throws up when she thinks about it or bursts into spontaneous tears of self loathing.
She's not a normal imperfect human who made a mistake; she's just a whore.
Why are you playing an MMORPG if you prefer not to interact with other players?
I'm happy to interact with other players. Doesn't mean I want to interact with every single asshole in the game.
Or you could instead say that its facilitating the catching of cheating rats.
A large number of people do not 'set out to cheat', but if you put them in an environment that facilitates it they may stray in a moment of weakness, often regretted, but which can't be undone.
If your married and don't want to cheat you should avoid spending a lot of time alone with members of the opposite sex. Period. That includes on facebook.
Facebook is precisely the sort of place you shouldn't go. The constant bombardment of people you used to know, or sort of know coupled with natural human curiosity, and the false sense of security one has from being 'its only online' I'm safely at home.
And suddenly your chatting up an ex, and keeping it secret because your spouse would be pissed, and then they want to meet for coffee and you keep that secret too, and besides its just a friend... and they have feelings for you, and its kind of flattering, and you know its wrong but its kind of exciting... and then you've done something you regret.
And of course the evidence is all over facebook for your spouse to find out about one day when you forgot to logout; if the STD you brought home doesn't give you away first.
Point reiterated -- a lot of people don't intend to cheat, but if they are in a situation where they end up having a secret relationship with a member of the opposite sex... its definitely going to happen sometimes. And facebook is a prime breeding ground for (re)kindling those sorts of relationships.
If you want to avoid it, stay off facebook entirely, or have a joint family account instead of a personal one. If your going to tempt fate by chatting with an ex, having your spouse sit in definitely puts a wet blanket on any sparks...
Its a good thing I prefer Adidas.
I haven't used my 360 or Wii for years, because there aren't any exclusive games out for them that really interest me.
I've got 2 kids under 10, the Wii never goes 2 days in a row without being turned on.
I've got a PC hooked up to the TV, steam with 100 titles, MAME, another dozen classics from GoG, and some humble bundles. Wireless xbox controller, keyboard, mouse, and joystick.
They barely touch it in comparison.
The 'hardcore' consoles are facing stiff competition from the PC, due to the fact that the advance of technology has somewhat levelled off and you can get a VERY competent PC inexpensively and it will last years without needing upgrades. And its fine for single player games, does the internet, and is overall a lot more flexible. Games tend to be cheaper, with free mods, etc, etc.
But the Wii ... and WiiU... they're really in a different market entirely. My kids aren't getting a smartphone anytime soon either. They each have a 3DS. Nintendo is safe for the near future.
I'm selling a 2001 Ford Escort. $2800 or BO.
Is it Blue?
It should also be noted that, in case it wasn't already obvious, HTC is much smaller than Samsung in the mobile space. It thus would not be hypocritical or illogical for Apple to be able to assert that Samsung caused irreparable harm while HTC did not
That's fair, but things do get a bit weird when something is 'for sale' to one customer but not to another. Its ok to negotiate different prices for different customers... but to tell one customer the product isn't for sale to them at any price can get one in trouble, especially if you are in a monopoly position -- which is precisely what a patent grants the holder.
GCHQ are now well within their rights to arrest the pigeon to learn it's secrets.
http://xkcd.com/538/
Looks like we've found an edge case where that might not work. I'm not putting it past them trying though.
. Fracking is simply the equivalent to swirling the straw around the bottom of the cup, trying to suck up the last dribbles of milkshake. If you have to frack, the well is dry.
Its more like easting the last buffalo, picking at the bones, worrying about starving, and then realizing you can eat insects.
Fracking is eating the insects. You might think your scraping the bottom of the barrel, but in truth you've just opened a MUCH bigger barrel. There is more biomass in insects than there ever was in buffalo... even before you started eating them.
What could go wrong?
This one time, at band camp...
Why would it matter to Samsung if the deal between Apple and HTC concerns some patents that are in dispute?
Apple has alleged that Samsung has caused them 'irreparable harm' by violating their patents, and has requested (and in somes cases gotten) injunctions against Samsung products in several cases now.
Samsungs counter argument is essentially:
(disputed assumption 1) Assuming your patents are valid, and (disputed assumption 2) Assuming we infringed those patents, then: its still not irreparable harm. Apple settled with HTC on those same patents which suggests that infringing those patents isn't irreparable, and that money can 'repair' the harm after all, and that therefore an injunction isn't needed.
Of course its all moot if Samsung is able to get assumption 1 or 2 invalidated, but they're fighting this case at every level.
When it means adding a significant load to an already overloaded conference committee for very little gain it is not worth doing.
So your objection now boils down to you being overworked and you don't have time to make it any better than it already is.
If by diversity you mean race and gender, you are wrong. Diversity in ideas is nice, but assuming that a black woman would think differently about an issue than a Chinese man is absurd. What if they both learned from the same book? They will likely have the same perspective.
On Ruby: likely.
On life: not likely.
On interacting with the audience: not likely.
Someone else pointed out: "If you are a white guy in china you'll likely be treated like a foreigner."
If your whole line up is one uniform group, then some of your audience is going to feel like a foreigner. Mix up the line up, and you'll connect with more of your audience.
Are you suggesting that the NBA needs to re-evaluate its scouting practices to make sure they're not discriminating?
Are you suggesting a conference lineup is somehow like an NBA team?
The NBA isn't looking for people with "different approaches to life" to make interesting presentations. That isn't even on the radar for them. They are looking for "top basketball players" and that's it.
It is perhaps somewhat interesting to notice who the audience for the NBA is. According to Wikipedia, according to neilson some 56% of African American men in S.F. tuned into the NBA playoffs on ABC in 2005. Care to guess how many Latino women watched it?
I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to attend a presentation by the 10 best Ruby coders in the country. Especially if no consideration was made of their presenting abilities or personalities.
BTW, I notice you had to add "upper middle class", "silicon valley startup" to try to make your point. Isn't that racial stereotyping?
I did that to make the line up as homogenous as possible. I'd have made them all brothers who grew up in the same house, went to the same school, and then graduated and worked for the same company if that didn't stretch credibility past the breaking point.
You know, not all white males are upper middle class nor do all white males start silicon valley companies.
Of course I know that. But its pretty easy to put a conference together with just those as speakers.
There are rich white males, poor white males, lower middle class white males, white males who live and work in places far from Silicon Valley like Wisconsin, Florida, Washington D.C. Maine, Australia, Poland, Russia and, believe it or not, places like South Africa, Hong Kong, Japan, and Singapore, and some of them suffer from racial discrimination and ethnic profiling.
Yup, agreed 100%, but if I'm putting together a conference. I'm trying to be more inclusive than just 'all the different kinds of white guy', but yeah absolutely I'd try to get white speaker from South Africa rather than a clone from California.
But why do you feel the need to throw race into it?
There are some differences in how people treat you...
That's enough of a reason right there.
fore example walk around as a white guy in Asia and you'll be treated as a foreigner - sometimes that's good and sometimes that's bad
So if you went to a conference as a white guy hosted entirely by chinese men who treated you as a foreigner... ?
But these aren't differences that would be significant to a Ruby conference.
Giving all your audience that extra sense of inclusion and welcome so they connect better is significant regardless of the topic.
Some people will connect better with some speakers than others based on personality, background, gender, and yes, even race, and will take away more from the conference if they connect. The more diverse the lineup, including race, the more audience you'll reach.
Would having a black guy be a criteria for a Ruby conference? Hell no, but I would make an effort to invite a mix of good speakers.