NEVER install Rational Application Developer (RAD). IBM managed to take a half-decent product, add tons of suck to it, and make sure it was the SLOWEST application in the history of mankind. You need at least 4GB to run it at a decent speed. Which is pretty sad when you consider that Windows only goes up to 3.5...
Not to mention it takes like 10 CDs and 5 hours to install...
Apple, on the other hand, included the 68LC040 emulator with all editions of Mac OS X 7 through 9 for PowerPC-based computers and all editions of Mac OS X 10.4 and 10.5 for Intel-based computers.
Maybe I misunderstand what you're saying, but Apple dropped OS 9 (etc) emulation in 10.5.
Does anyone see any real benefit for a business user to switch to Vista?
If (if) the improved security claims pan out, the amount of money you'd save on repairing infected clients would be a benefit.
The new version of SMB could* mean better performance for your clients' shared drives - if you have file servers running an updated Windows Server 2003 (*I have not tested this).
That's about all I can think of.
You can put me squarely in the 90%.
All our applications tested fine in Vista, but that's not a benefit, that's just the absence of a big problem.
If we do move to Vista, it would be an incremental thing - newly purchased PCs and laptops only. That's a pain because now you've got to support 2 different client OSes - this was much less an issue when moving from Windows 2000 to XP because they were so similar.
I can't imagine trying an actual migration of all existing XP (and in our case, some old straggling Windows 2000) clients to Vista - both for post-implementation performance issues and the pain of doing the actual migration. Not to mention I'm sure we've got a few clients that wouldn't meet even the Vista minimum requirements.
The regular Zen supports it but as far as I can tell some of their newer products like the Zen Vision W and Zen Vision M don't. If you have anything new to add to that feel free. I linked the mfr site already earlier but here's a review:
http://www.mobiletechreview.com/mediaplayers/Creative-Zen-Vision-W.htm Quote from the review: If you're an iTunes user who has ripped CDs into AAC format, sorry the Zen Vision W doesn't support AAC so you'll have to re-rip your CD or use a converter.
Review of the Sandisk eSansa 280: http://www.zdnet.com.au/reviews/coolgear/audio/soa/SanDisk-Sansa-e280-8GB-/0,139023372,139267548,00.htm Quote from the review: The biggest shortcoming we can see is that the e280 does not support the AAC file format, meaning those who have purchased a wealth of songs from the iTunes Music Store will not be able to transfer them to the player.
I'm sure some of their models support/supported AAC which is why it's on the Wikipedia entry. I linked the newegg page earlier that doesn't list AAC as a supported format; maybe they'll add it later.
I think it'd be great if they all supported AAC but they don't. In fact it's puzzling to me that since AAC is so popular that players are released that don't support it, but they don't.
It's becoming hard to find MP3 players that don't support the format.
I discussed this in a branch-off thread that you skipped, yes I was wrong about the Zune, but see my previous post:
Sandisk Sansa, Creative Zen W, Creative Zen M, Creative Zen Stone...
It's actually kind of surprising to me that AAC isn't universally supported, since iTunes has sold like a bazillion songs in the format. It's also disappointing that something patent-free like ogg vorbis isn't more supported.
As I said I could be wrong, but which ones? All iPods, obviously, which are the lion's share of the market, but the next biggest players in the market AFIAK are Creative, Sandisk and Microsoft, and after looking at their products on their own sites (and on newegg) none of them mention AAC support. I'm perfectly happy with my iPod and all, but when that dies I might want some shiny new one from some other mfr. AAC may be superior (the difference between it and MP3 at the same bitrate is imperceptible to my ears, though it's widely published otherwise), but I hardly see any players that don't support MP3. Hell, they even call them "MP3 Players" in a Kleenex-esque sort of brand name/object name confusion.
and generally WMA when it also supports that PlaysForSure thing from Microsoft that they don't even use anymore
I don't use WMA for the same reason, though sort of reversed (not supported by Apple for obvious reasons but supported by Creative/Sandisk), but like AAC it seems to be tied too much to one vendor for my taste - at least Fraunhofer effs everyone equally and don't have a dog in which device manufacturer you use.
And I definitely wouldn't buy anything using PlaysForSure, or any other DRM for that matter!
I'd be happy if ogg vorbis was more supported but since support for it is practically nil on devices, I use FLAC for lossless (don't use lossless files on portable devices anyway) and MP3 for lossy.
I guess if I were convinced I was going to stick with Apple forever I'd go ahead and use AAC.
Any MP3 player? AFIAK iTunes still only sells in m4a/AAC format, so you still can't use with Creative Zen, Sandisk or Microsoft without converting (kind of a pain) and losing quality. Maybe I'm wrong? I have an iPod but don't use the iTunes store because I'm not sure I'll always have a player that will read those files - first because of their DRM and now just the format.
MP3 despite Fraunhofer's licensing still seems to be the most universally supported and has had such market penetration I'm much more comfortable using that as my lossy format for ripping, which is why I like the idea of Amazon's MP3 store.
This weekend I saw some idiot wearing a bluetooth earpiece during dinner, while conversing with his date - he never took it off the whole time. You think a little cord coming out of you phone to plug into a battery pack in your pocket is really that absurd?
Besides this isn't just a phone, it's a PDA, mobile web browser, MP3 player and phone. An external battery might be quite useful for power users.
There is redundancy, and "dependable" probably fits (I've not worked on this product, it seems nice a priori), but anyone who's spent a significant amount of time working in IT knows nothing is "unbreakable". It's just laughable. Give it enough time, something (or someone) will break it.
It's not like we haven't heard boastful claims from salesmen before. When something breaks we say "it's not a bug, it's a feature", if it's a third-party product we usually add "it works just like the salesman said it would!"
One of the things that most surprised me in testing the Beta was that it prompted me if I wanted to run task manager.
I thought, "Are you kidding me? Effing task manager???"
If some program or service has run amok and is hogging up resources, the last thing I want is an extra process to run in order to prompt me, before task manager comes up so I can discover and kill the runaway process.
At the very least they should have included a white list checkbox, i.e. "check to always run this.exe without asking".
The nuisance factor is either going to turn the UACs into white noise, or people will just turn them off, either way it's a very poor implementation that I think will ultimately be ineffective.
a) Maybe Claritin was a poor example to use here because now it's generic. It was one of the first prescription drugs to be advertised on TV though, which is what I intended to refer to in my comment.
That does bring up a good point though. First, I'm talking about physicians, not pharmacists. Physicians may or may not know the corresponding generic, but out of laziness or whatever contract the pharma's sales rep signed with the clinic, they may just write down the brand name. Secondly, pharmacists may (should) know your prescription has a generic counterpart - but they may not have an incentive to tell you to buy it.
b) Tylenol PM is not indicated for insomnia, but for "headaches and minor aches/pains with accompanying sleeplessness". It may sound similar, but it's not insomnia or chronic insomnia, which I believe is historically under-treated.
Now whether or not Tylenol PM is effective in treating insomnia is another issue all together. But they can't advertise it to treat insomnia (I don't believe), which doesn't bring people who suffer from insomnia into clinics asking for treatment.
I think that's a good point, and not just internet distribution - cable/satellite video on demand as well. People are going to start realizing they don't need to buy/carry around/mail(netflix) these shiny discs at all.
As far as the dual format players, they may make the "format war" irrelevant to consumers. I don't care if the new Fred Ward vehicle "Remo Williams: The Return" is on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, I just know it's in HD and will look great. This might actually prolong the war.
But since the big "war" is fought through content (movie) distribution anyway, if physical media falls out of favor for this purpose, it'll just be techies using them to save data - that is, if flash drives don't underprice them (probably won't). Then I think whoever can sell me a stack of 500 for 35 cents will win.
But then, that'd be at least 7 Terabytes. That's a lot of midget pr0n.
There are good and bad things to consider with these ads.
The ads can create an artificial demand for the reason you cited. Doctors may be medical professionals, but they're not perfect, and are frequently busy. Sometimes it's easier just to write a 'scrip' for Claritin, it's not going to do any harm, and will get you on to your next patient.
Most (if not all) of the prescription drugs being advertised do not have a generic version available, but certainly, yes, generic alternative treatments may be available, and in some cases may be better. But rather than breaking out the PDR, the doc may just write the prescription - so in some cases generics (which are usually much cheaper) may get the shaft.
On the other hand, the one being advertised may be better.
Also, most importantly, frequently the drugs being advertised treat historically under treated conditions - erectile dysfunction, insomnia, depression, etc. The patient may not have even come through the door if not for the adverts.
I'm torn on whether they should continue to be allowed or not, I think for now the right approach is to crack down on these ambiguous ads. "Oh look, take Flometraxia, and you too can run in meadows, throw footballs and dance, dance, dance the night away! Ask your doctor!
Flometraxia may cause anal lesions, internal bleeding, projectile vomiting and shortness of breath. Should you experience these symptoms, take some more Flometraxia before consulting a physician
Vista has built-in DRM, in that it allows you to play HD-DVD or Blu-Ray through an HDCP output. Otherwise it would be downgraded to 480p or whatever.
Don't like hamstrung hardware? You probably won't be playing any HD-DVD movies, so it will be a non-issue.
Apple will follow suit. Linux will be in a bind, and probably won't support copy-protected HD content.
Other than that, Vista supports DRM in that it will play DRM'd content. There's nothing in WMP11 that will stop you from ripping CDs to DRM-free MP3 format.
But it's easy to spread FUD about DRM. MPAA! DMCA! RIAA! Oh, my! Vista's gonna secretly call the feds on my when I put in my K-Fed bootleg!
That said, having tested Vista on several systems, it's a slight improvement if you've got great hardware and don't need 100% of it for performance (like gaming). Otherwise I can't see a compelling reason to upgrade until some DX10 games to come out.
I think a lot of people defend Microsoft because even though Microsoft's big and evil, a lot of the criticism they receive from PonyTailLibertarianLinuxAdmins is unfair or inaccurate. It may not be the person defending Microsoft is a "fanboi" or "zealot", but rather is defending them because the attack is bullshit. Not everyone is arguing to advance an ideology.
Case in point, "It's not their freedom. It's not the stability of their system. It's not it's ease of use."
Actually I've found XP to be extremely stable, and very easy to use. I value my freedom but as far as computer operating systems go, it's not at the top of the list. It's not like I'm William Wallace being disemboweled because I asked to modify the source code and recompile.
You say it's probably because both people paid for it, and because they didn't pay for it, either way it's not because of how the system works. I think the fact your post got modded "insightful" throws your assertion into question of there being more Windows "fanbois" than Linux "fanbois" on here.
Based on this, I'd say your list of "possible reasons" is less of an honest attempt at guessing other peoples' motivations than it is a childish attempt to disparage Windows users.
You claim this isn't a flame and just want to know why is Windows "better" than Linux?
I'd say Windows is not better than Linux, just better suited to most people!
Biggest advantages are
#1 drivers, hardware support, ability to choose own hardware
-honestly being able to download an.exe and double-click, hit next-next-next-finish for your new video card is way better than the usual alternative on Linux. Ditto with most software installation. Mac is closing the gap here.
#2 intuitive GUIs for most functions/no requirment to RTFM/know a bunch of command line tools (MacOSX shares this advantage, some Linux distros are closing the gap)
#3 quick learning curve
#4 big selection of free (as in beer and/or freedom) and non-free software (still better than Macs)
#5 no need to grow pony tail or beard (though I do have a beard)
I've tried MacOSX, Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu. They all work fine, though when I tried to update Ubuntu from "Diaper Dave" to "Edgy Ent" or whatever, X-Window failed to load. At this point I could a) reinstall from scratch, b) spend a few hours on forums and try to fix, or c) go back to my Windows machine or another Linux machine.
I'll probably try to fix it eventually, but honestly try to think about the majority of users. They don't want to know how their system works, just that their system works, and runs their software. They also have ONE computer. Mind-blowing, I know. They don't want to spend hours learning how to use the system or fixing problems.
As far as your games comment, I like PC games, and I'll play games on my PC thankyouverymuch. I'm not going to buy a 360 or PS3 (though I want a Wii).
I'd say I'm mostly a Windows user. I use Linux when I want to learn Linux. When I just want to use a computer, I use Windows.
I watched a nature show where some hyenas were moving in on a lioness's kill. It was fairly dramatic as there were eventually enough hyenas to endanger the lioness.
Then you heard a loud, fearsome roar, and the camera panned over to a big male lion with a dead hyena in his mouth. He shook the dead body vigorously, then threw it up into the air, and the body fell limp amongst the rest of the hyenas. They all ran off in what looked like a panicked state.
I think IBM could learn some lessons from that lion about what to do with SCO's corpse.
If you agree with me, you should vote because it's your civic responsibility. If not, you should remain uninformed of the candidates and refrain from voting.
Slashdot Mirror
Hello, airplanes? It's blimps. You win.
Here:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/08/msi-shows-off-10-inch-android-tablet-running-new-tegra-chipset/
Now you've heard of one, it will reportedly be available later this year for $500.
http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/10/25/apple-quietly-disposes-of-classic-in-leopard
The new version of SMB could* mean better performance for your clients' shared drives - if you have file servers running an updated Windows Server 2003 (*I have not tested this).
That's about all I can think of.
You can put me squarely in the 90%.
All our applications tested fine in Vista, but that's not a benefit, that's just the absence of a big problem. If we do move to Vista, it would be an incremental thing - newly purchased PCs and laptops only. That's a pain because now you've got to support 2 different client OSes - this was much less an issue when moving from Windows 2000 to XP because they were so similar.
I can't imagine trying an actual migration of all existing XP (and in our case, some old straggling Windows 2000) clients to Vista - both for post-implementation performance issues and the pain of doing the actual migration. Not to mention I'm sure we've got a few clients that wouldn't meet even the Vista minimum requirements.
Again, I already said this earlier.
The regular Zen supports it but as far as I can tell some of their newer products like the Zen Vision W and Zen Vision M don't. If you have anything new to add to that feel free. I linked the mfr site already earlier but here's a review:
http://www.mobiletechreview.com/mediaplayers/Creative-Zen-Vision-W.htm
Quote from the review: If you're an iTunes user who has ripped CDs into AAC format, sorry the Zen Vision W doesn't support AAC so you'll have to re-rip your CD or use a converter.
Review of the Sandisk eSansa 280:
http://www.zdnet.com.au/reviews/coolgear/audio/soa/SanDisk-Sansa-e280-8GB-/0,139023372,139267548,00.htm
Quote from the review: The biggest shortcoming we can see is that the e280 does not support the AAC file format, meaning those who have purchased a wealth of songs from the iTunes Music Store will not be able to transfer them to the player.
I'm sure some of their models support/supported AAC which is why it's on the Wikipedia entry.
I linked the newegg page earlier that doesn't list AAC as a supported format; maybe they'll add it later.
I think it'd be great if they all supported AAC but they don't. In fact it's puzzling to me that since AAC is so popular that players are released that don't support it, but they don't.
Sandisk Sansa, Creative Zen W, Creative Zen M, Creative Zen Stone...
http://www.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=213&subcategory=214&product=15752&nav=1&bypass=1
http://www.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=213&subcategory=214&product=14331&nav=1&bypass=1
http://www.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=213&subcategory=214&product=16696&nav=1&bypass=1
it really wasn't hard to find them.
It's actually kind of surprising to me that AAC isn't universally supported, since iTunes has sold like a bazillion songs in the format. It's also disappointing that something patent-free like ogg vorbis isn't more supported.
Yes I did look at the manufacturer sites (obviously with the exception of the Zune site, I just assumed incorrectly).
I looked at the Sandisk site here:
http://www.sandisk.com/Products/Item(2057)-SDMX4-8192-A70-Sansa_e280_MP3_Player_8GB.aspx
Doesn't list formats (at least not where I can see) so I just checked newegg (specifications tab):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16855125013
The specs tab lists "Supported Audio Formats MP3/WMA/WMA with DRM"
no mention of mp4/AAC.
And Creative Zen W:
http://www.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=213&subcategory=214&product=15752&nav=1&bypass=1
Audio Playback Formats: MP3, WMA, WAV
no mention of mp4/AAC.
So I checked a couple other players -
Zen Vision M won't or doesn't list it: http://www.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=213&subcategory=214&product=14331&nav=1&bypass=1
Zen Stone plus won't or doesn't list it: http://www.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=213&subcategory=214&product=16696&nav=1&bypass=1
The regular Zen does
So at least one player from their current offering supports it but many of their players don't seem to unless I'm missing something.
Still the one consistency is that they all support MP3.
I do find it interesting that the Zune supports AAC, filed under "learn something new every day". Thanks for the link.
I'd be happy if ogg vorbis was more supported but since support for it is practically nil on devices, I use FLAC for lossless (don't use lossless files on portable devices anyway) and MP3 for lossy.
I guess if I were convinced I was going to stick with Apple forever I'd go ahead and use AAC.
Any MP3 player? AFIAK iTunes still only sells in m4a/AAC format, so you still can't use with Creative Zen, Sandisk or Microsoft without converting (kind of a pain) and losing quality. Maybe I'm wrong? I have an iPod but don't use the iTunes store because I'm not sure I'll always have a player that will read those files - first because of their DRM and now just the format.
MP3 despite Fraunhofer's licensing still seems to be the most universally supported and has had such market penetration I'm much more comfortable using that as my lossy format for ripping, which is why I like the idea of Amazon's MP3 store.
Besides this isn't just a phone, it's a PDA, mobile web browser, MP3 player and phone. An external battery might be quite useful for power users.
It's not like we haven't heard boastful claims from salesmen before. When something breaks we say "it's not a bug, it's a feature", if it's a third-party product we usually add "it works just like the salesman said it would!"
One of the things that most surprised me in testing the Beta was that it prompted me if I wanted to run task manager. .exe without asking".
I thought, "Are you kidding me? Effing task manager???"
If some program or service has run amok and is hogging up resources, the last thing I want is an extra process to run in order to prompt me, before task manager comes up so I can discover and kill the runaway process.
At the very least they should have included a white list checkbox, i.e. "check to always run this
The nuisance factor is either going to turn the UACs into white noise, or people will just turn them off, either way it's a very poor implementation that I think will ultimately be ineffective.
That does bring up a good point though. First, I'm talking about physicians, not pharmacists. Physicians may or may not know the corresponding generic, but out of laziness or whatever contract the pharma's sales rep signed with the clinic, they may just write down the brand name. Secondly, pharmacists may (should) know your prescription has a generic counterpart - but they may not have an incentive to tell you to buy it.
b) Tylenol PM is not indicated for insomnia, but for "headaches and minor aches/pains with accompanying sleeplessness". It may sound similar, but it's not insomnia or chronic insomnia, which I believe is historically under-treated.
Now whether or not Tylenol PM is effective in treating insomnia is another issue all together. But they can't advertise it to treat insomnia (I don't believe), which doesn't bring people who suffer from insomnia into clinics asking for treatment.
As far as the dual format players, they may make the "format war" irrelevant to consumers. I don't care if the new Fred Ward vehicle "Remo Williams: The Return" is on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, I just know it's in HD and will look great. This might actually prolong the war.
But since the big "war" is fought through content (movie) distribution anyway, if physical media falls out of favor for this purpose, it'll just be techies using them to save data - that is, if flash drives don't underprice them (probably won't). Then I think whoever can sell me a stack of 500 for 35 cents will win.
But then, that'd be at least 7 Terabytes. That's a lot of midget pr0n.
The ads can create an artificial demand for the reason you cited. Doctors may be medical professionals, but they're not perfect, and are frequently busy. Sometimes it's easier just to write a 'scrip' for Claritin, it's not going to do any harm, and will get you on to your next patient.
Most (if not all) of the prescription drugs being advertised do not have a generic version available, but certainly, yes, generic alternative treatments may be available, and in some cases may be better. But rather than breaking out the PDR, the doc may just write the prescription - so in some cases generics (which are usually much cheaper) may get the shaft.
On the other hand, the one being advertised may be better.
Also, most importantly, frequently the drugs being advertised treat historically under treated conditions - erectile dysfunction, insomnia, depression, etc. The patient may not have even come through the door if not for the adverts.
I'm torn on whether they should continue to be allowed or not, I think for now the right approach is to crack down on these ambiguous ads. "Oh look, take Flometraxia, and you too can run in meadows, throw footballs and dance, dance, dance the night away! Ask your doctor!
Flometraxia may cause anal lesions, internal bleeding, projectile vomiting and shortness of breath. Should you experience these symptoms, take some more Flometraxia before consulting a physician
Don't like hamstrung hardware? You probably won't be playing any HD-DVD movies, so it will be a non-issue.
Apple will follow suit. Linux will be in a bind, and probably won't support copy-protected HD content.
Other than that, Vista supports DRM in that it will play DRM'd content. There's nothing in WMP11 that will stop you from ripping CDs to DRM-free MP3 format.
But it's easy to spread FUD about DRM. MPAA! DMCA! RIAA! Oh, my! Vista's gonna secretly call the feds on my when I put in my K-Fed bootleg!
That said, having tested Vista on several systems, it's a slight improvement if you've got great hardware and don't need 100% of it for performance (like gaming). Otherwise I can't see a compelling reason to upgrade until some DX10 games to come out.
You're a dumb terminal.
I'm a balding beardy, but since I'm not a Libertarian I am shunned from both groups.
Case in point, "It's not their freedom. It's not the stability of their system. It's not it's ease of use." Actually I've found XP to be extremely stable, and very easy to use. I value my freedom but as far as computer operating systems go, it's not at the top of the list. It's not like I'm William Wallace being disemboweled because I asked to modify the source code and recompile.
You say it's probably because both people paid for it, and because they didn't pay for it, either way it's not because of how the system works. I think the fact your post got modded "insightful" throws your assertion into question of there being more Windows "fanbois" than Linux "fanbois" on here.
Based on this, I'd say your list of "possible reasons" is less of an honest attempt at guessing other peoples' motivations than it is a childish attempt to disparage Windows users.
You claim this isn't a flame and just want to know why is Windows "better" than Linux?
I'd say Windows is not better than Linux, just better suited to most people! Biggest advantages are .exe and double-click, hit next-next-next-finish for your new video card is way better than the usual alternative on Linux. Ditto with most software installation. Mac is closing the gap here.
#1 drivers, hardware support, ability to choose own hardware -honestly being able to download an
#2 intuitive GUIs for most functions/no requirment to RTFM/know a bunch of command line tools (MacOSX shares this advantage, some Linux distros are closing the gap)
#3 quick learning curve
#4 big selection of free (as in beer and/or freedom) and non-free software (still better than Macs)
#5 no need to grow pony tail or beard (though I do have a beard)
I've tried MacOSX, Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu. They all work fine, though when I tried to update Ubuntu from "Diaper Dave" to "Edgy Ent" or whatever, X-Window failed to load. At this point I could a) reinstall from scratch, b) spend a few hours on forums and try to fix, or c) go back to my Windows machine or another Linux machine.
I'll probably try to fix it eventually, but honestly try to think about the majority of users. They don't want to know how their system works, just that their system works, and runs their software. They also have ONE computer. Mind-blowing, I know. They don't want to spend hours learning how to use the system or fixing problems.
As far as your games comment, I like PC games, and I'll play games on my PC thankyouverymuch. I'm not going to buy a 360 or PS3 (though I want a Wii).
I'd say I'm mostly a Windows user. I use Linux when I want to learn Linux. When I just want to use a computer, I use Windows.
they had pirates in Draconia
I watched a nature show where some hyenas were moving in on a lioness's kill. It was fairly dramatic as there were eventually enough hyenas to endanger the lioness.
Then you heard a loud, fearsome roar, and the camera panned over to a big male lion with a dead hyena in his mouth. He shook the dead body vigorously, then threw it up into the air, and the body fell limp amongst the rest of the hyenas. They all ran off in what looked like a panicked state.
I think IBM could learn some lessons from that lion about what to do with SCO's corpse.
You mean they're an actual band? I thought they were full-time, publicity-seeking commentators on VH1!
If you agree with me, you should vote because it's your civic responsibility. If not, you should remain uninformed of the candidates and refrain from voting.