All I hear is a bunch of bogus excuses. No, you don't need hosting. I have my own web server set up at home, on my home PC, and you can access it from the internet. So it is "basically free". I can also get free hosting from my ISP (2GB worth), again, for free.
The firesheep thing is a load of crap. First, you don't need to take contributions. Secondly, you can still take contributions without firesheep, just take them through paypal.
As for SSL, it costs nothing to create your own certificate, again, for free. Sure, your users may get a pop up box saying they don't trust the creator, but if you want to get rid of that, you can always buy one, they really aren't that expensive.
As for IPv4, I've never paid for any of my IPv4 addresses, and I have quite a few.
If someone like you interviewed with me, I'd cut the interview short, because I would expect this type of behavior in the work place. Missing deadlines, because they are incompetant, and then giving a long list of bogus excuses of why it can't/couldn't be done, when the guy next to you is doing it in half the time.
Perhaps you need to review Microsofts financials before saying such silly things. 2009 was the only year in which sales went down, 2010 they increased by 7%, and so far expectations are that they will increase by 15% (approximately).
Date / Sales / Growth June 30, 2011 $71.85B 15% (estimated) June 30, 2010 $62.48B 7% June 30, 2009 $58.44B -3% June 30, 2008 $60.42B 18% June 30, 2007 $51.12B 15% June 30, 2006 $44.28B 11% June 30, 2005 $39.79B 8% June 30, 2004 $36.84B 14% June 30, 2003 $32.19B 13% June 30, 2002 $28.37B 12% June 30, 2001 $25.30B 10%
Not exactly. In that case, you no longer have a tangible object to make an investment into. Nor have you really devoted anything. You've refrained from devoting/using/giving, which isn't the same thing.
Examples: Bloomberg: "Maximizing Your College Investment" - Do you consider college a consumption, and therefore unable to be also an investment?
If you were a farmer, if it costs you $2000 a day in labor to mow/cut/mulch your land, would buying a $10000 piece of machinery not be an investment if it lowered your daily labor cost to $1000, or is that also just consumption?
Then you would be incorrect. You can memorize patterns that will help you solve rubiks cube of course, but you can solve it without help or memorizing anything.
Investments can also be used to describe a cost reduction. In this case, it may reduce the amount of money the poster spends on other forms of entertainment, or the need to replace the equipment sooner. Both of those would decrease expense. Although, if you've ever taken your family of 4-5 to the movie theater, you know you can easily spend $14 per person on tickets, and $30 on concessions (14x5+30=$120). So a $2000 investment on a TV, if it saves you from going to the movies 17 times over the lifetime of the TV, has saved you money.
36% of the people are using cloud based services through Hotmail, Yahoo, GMail. Additionally, a fair amount of your 44% of "Outlook/Thunderbird/Etc" clients, are also likely using cloud based services. For example, the email on the machine I'm sitting on is "Outlook", but the server it's connecting to is in the cloud.
36%+a portion of 44% isn't "Nothing". It's quickly approaching a majority.
I have yet to find any OSS IDE that beats VS, including Eclipse. Eclipse is much much slower than VS, doesn't have nearly all the same capability, and doesn't look nearly as good.
That is a nice quote, and it sure makes a nice sound bite, but unfortunately, Thomas Reardon was a programmer working on IE. He had no direct influence on the direction of the server & tools group at Microsoft, so you might as well be quoting some random noob from the internet. It's included in the EU's "research", which is a very nice way of saying absolutely anything the EU's prosecutors could spin to their favor. Notice how the EU never did anything based on it? There was no backlash regarding java? Well, there was a reason for that.
The problem with that is that it's just testing specific features, and it tends to spend a lot of time (and points) on things that aren't typically relevant, but may (or may not) even make it into the final HTML 5 spec. The more important features are simply glanced over, giving them 1-2 points, while stupid things are given 20+ points that the vast majority of sites will never use. That site is nice as a checklist, but terrible at determining how well a browser is fit for today's and tomorrow's web pages.
Well, IE will stop being so bad when they release IE 10, and everyone upgrades to it. Otherwise, I have a list of things that are holding us back or wasting tons of development time because we still need to support IE 7. On the other hand, I also have a list for firefox, Opera, Safari, and Chrome, but they aren't nearly as long.
You realize you just said the same thing just with a different spin. If they made it work more natively with Windows, that automatically implies that it would limit portability if you used those extensions. So they created C# so they would no longer be limited to doing exactly what SUN did (and absolutely no more than that). Which is why well written C# apps will always out perform java apps.
Instead of being a whiny little bitch, perhaps you should do some research. Most of your claims are bullshit. For example, "The average speed of Internet connections at world level is 1.9 Mbps, in Romania it is 7.0 Mbps and in the United States 5.0 Mbps.". So the United States is well above the average, and Romania, the country you championed, actually only has high speed connectivity to local places. International traffic is most commonly limited to 256-2048 kbit/s even though they may actually have a 100Mb/s 100Base-T "connection". The average US connection is many times better than that. Additionally, 33% of their "broadband" connections are cellular, which they include EDGE in there, ROFLMAO!
WAKE UP and stop flinging your bullshit around. Feel free to tether your PC to your 2G cell phone and tell me how great the Romanian "broadband" is.
Slashdot Mirror
And quite honestly, you aren't ready for a programming job either.
All I hear is a bunch of bogus excuses. No, you don't need hosting. I have my own web server set up at home, on my home PC, and you can access it from the internet. So it is "basically free". I can also get free hosting from my ISP (2GB worth), again, for free.
The firesheep thing is a load of crap. First, you don't need to take contributions. Secondly, you can still take contributions without firesheep, just take them through paypal.
As for SSL, it costs nothing to create your own certificate, again, for free. Sure, your users may get a pop up box saying they don't trust the creator, but if you want to get rid of that, you can always buy one, they really aren't that expensive.
As for IPv4, I've never paid for any of my IPv4 addresses, and I have quite a few.
If someone like you interviewed with me, I'd cut the interview short, because I would expect this type of behavior in the work place. Missing deadlines, because they are incompetant, and then giving a long list of bogus excuses of why it can't/couldn't be done, when the guy next to you is doing it in half the time.
Perhaps you need to review Microsofts financials before saying such silly things. 2009 was the only year in which sales went down, 2010 they increased by 7%, and so far expectations are that they will increase by 15% (approximately).
Date / Sales / Growth
June 30, 2011 $71.85B 15% (estimated)
June 30, 2010 $62.48B 7%
June 30, 2009 $58.44B -3%
June 30, 2008 $60.42B 18%
June 30, 2007 $51.12B 15%
June 30, 2006 $44.28B 11%
June 30, 2005 $39.79B 8%
June 30, 2004 $36.84B 14%
June 30, 2003 $32.19B 13%
June 30, 2002 $28.37B 12%
June 30, 2001 $25.30B 10%
what is the main selling point for Linux on servers?
It's free. Nothing about five 9's at all. If you want five 9's you run a cluster, not a single box running any OS.
Security Advice from the National Security Agency seems appropriate.
Manual means that it isn't running, and must be MANUALLY started. Remote Desktop isn't enabled by default, so both your examples were false.
You didn't even have to read the article. Seriously, you just needed to read the message you replied to. I know this is slashdot and all, but come on.
Not exactly. In that case, you no longer have a tangible object to make an investment into. Nor have you really devoted anything. You've refrained from devoting/using/giving, which isn't the same thing.
Examples:
Bloomberg: "Maximizing Your College Investment" - Do you consider college a consumption, and therefore unable to be also an investment?
If you were a farmer, if it costs you $2000 a day in labor to mow/cut/mulch your land, would buying a $10000 piece of machinery not be an investment if it lowered your daily labor cost to $1000, or is that also just consumption?
Then you would be incorrect. You can memorize patterns that will help you solve rubiks cube of course, but you can solve it without help or memorizing anything.
The two are not mutually exclusive, but you would know that from your Econ 101 class, had you attended it.
Using a word as it is defined isn't daft. Perhaps a refresher of what the word means, from the dictionary:
Investment: a devoting, using, or giving of time, talent, emotional energy, etc., as for a purpose or to achieve something
If your goal is to reduce costs, then devoting (money/time/effort) to achieve that is an investment.
Investments can also be used to describe a cost reduction. In this case, it may reduce the amount of money the poster spends on other forms of entertainment, or the need to replace the equipment sooner. Both of those would decrease expense. Although, if you've ever taken your family of 4-5 to the movie theater, you know you can easily spend $14 per person on tickets, and $30 on concessions (14x5+30=$120). So a $2000 investment on a TV, if it saves you from going to the movies 17 times over the lifetime of the TV, has saved you money.
So it's not growing as fast as people think?
36% of the people are using cloud based services through Hotmail, Yahoo, GMail. Additionally, a fair amount of your 44% of "Outlook/Thunderbird/Etc" clients, are also likely using cloud based services. For example, the email on the machine I'm sitting on is "Outlook", but the server it's connecting to is in the cloud.
36%+a portion of 44% isn't "Nothing". It's quickly approaching a majority.
Because it isn't. There are more Androids than iPhones, but there are more iOS devices than android devices by a very large margin (50%).
Additionally, the average iOS user is willing to pay more than the average android user.
I have yet to find any OSS IDE that beats VS, including Eclipse. Eclipse is much much slower than VS, doesn't have nearly all the same capability, and doesn't look nearly as good.
Really? Where do you think most people get their email clients from? Gmail, hotmail, yahoo, etc?
I refuse to believe in any intelligence report where they repeatedly misspell the topic of the report, namely chemical materiel, haha.
A better motto would be: Intelligence Reports for those with sub 80 IQs written by those with sub 80 IQs.
The same way DRM allows you to play stuff, but it comes with restrictions? You mean that kind of freedom?
Sounds good to me. My lawyers will just ask for 10 times possible damages, and I'll be able to retire.
That is a nice quote, and it sure makes a nice sound bite, but unfortunately, Thomas Reardon was a programmer working on IE. He had no direct influence on the direction of the server & tools group at Microsoft, so you might as well be quoting some random noob from the internet. It's included in the EU's "research", which is a very nice way of saying absolutely anything the EU's prosecutors could spin to their favor. Notice how the EU never did anything based on it? There was no backlash regarding java? Well, there was a reason for that.
The problem with that is that it's just testing specific features, and it tends to spend a lot of time (and points) on things that aren't typically relevant, but may (or may not) even make it into the final HTML 5 spec. The more important features are simply glanced over, giving them 1-2 points, while stupid things are given 20+ points that the vast majority of sites will never use. That site is nice as a checklist, but terrible at determining how well a browser is fit for today's and tomorrow's web pages.
Sorry, I would rank them Firefox, IE 9/10, Safari, Chrome, Opera, then IE 7, with IE 6 so far down the list that fails to continue existing.
Well, IE will stop being so bad when they release IE 10, and everyone upgrades to it. Otherwise, I have a list of things that are holding us back or wasting tons of development time because we still need to support IE 7. On the other hand, I also have a list for firefox, Opera, Safari, and Chrome, but they aren't nearly as long.
You realize you just said the same thing just with a different spin. If they made it work more natively with Windows, that automatically implies that it would limit portability if you used those extensions. So they created C# so they would no longer be limited to doing exactly what SUN did (and absolutely no more than that). Which is why well written C# apps will always out perform java apps.
Instead of being a whiny little bitch, perhaps you should do some research. Most of your claims are bullshit. For example, "The average speed of Internet connections at world level is 1.9 Mbps, in Romania it is 7.0 Mbps and in the United States 5.0 Mbps.". So the United States is well above the average, and Romania, the country you championed, actually only has high speed connectivity to local places. International traffic is most commonly limited to 256-2048 kbit/s even though they may actually have a 100Mb/s 100Base-T "connection". The average US connection is many times better than that. Additionally, 33% of their "broadband" connections are cellular, which they include EDGE in there, ROFLMAO!
WAKE UP and stop flinging your bullshit around. Feel free to tether your PC to your 2G cell phone and tell me how great the Romanian "broadband" is.