seriously, once you go to hdd you're pretty much a computer. Silly thing is for the prices we are seeing it's getting to the point of why bother with the console when you can get the computer for the same price.
Then again this is why MS got in the game, they see the PlayStation as a threat to the windows OS. Once you can plug in a printer, run office apps, send email, and browse the web on a PlayStation why bother with a IBM clone. Big problem for Sony is they need to keep the price down to make it more sensible to buy the "console" instead of the "computer".
Average things you do with a computer
play games
Email
Office Apps
Browse the Web
Things you do with a Console
Play games
Add those other three things and a large part of the population will say "I need that computer why?". Actually come to think of it, get a browser working and hook up with gmail and you cover a large portion of the big 3.
If someone had a certain item stolen and then looked in your window and saw that similar item in your house, they do not have the right to break down your door and check the serial # to make sure it isn't theirs. Yet for some reason big software companies have to right to invade my personal property (my computer) to verify that I actually own the software. This totally bypasses our entire legal system and our constitution and I have no idea why they are getting away with it.
Yes!! I second that! We have 95% of our users on just user rights and the biggest problem is software. There has been one or two software packages that I couldn't get around the "Need Administrator rights to run" problem. It amazes me how both MS and other software companies have a blatant disregard for this major security issue!
Let say:
A knife
you can use a knife to cut something or spread you butter on your crumpet
or
You can use a knife to stab someone to death
so do you make the knife illegal simply because it can be used for a bad purpose?
Same goes with software....
"It's hard AND DANGEROUS to install new programs on Windows platforms"
Give me a break, are you telling me you have a hard time clicking the next button??!!?
It's not easy to install most software and when you do manage to install the software most still don't show up in the programs list. The average user relies icons not the command line that's where windows has you beat. I'm a computer professional and I like Linux and it's abilities, but there is no way my mom or dad could use it as far as installing new programs goes.
And there are several, was that people should have never been allowed to save a document in their perspective mailboxes. Any documents should have been automatically saved in some form of folder on a file server.
When you live in a society that advertises to kids that playing some sport is more important than learning or creating something new. It's even worse when some guy who runs around throwing a ball to another guy makes millions while your average computer person (who has spend around 100k going to school for 4 years) will maybe make it to middle class after 5 more years of working in their chosen profession. I'd have to say what pisses me off the most is that some white trash chick like Britney Spears can become one of the most popular with our kids simply because the RIAA uses her looks and sexuality to sell CD's. Hell, it's not even about the music anymore. Basically we tell our kids it's more important to be pretty or famous than to be smart and hard working.
Actually there was an episode involving worf that hit on that. I think data or someone asked him why they looked like that and he said it was an embarrassing experiment gone wrong or something like that LOL
1. you already know they are going to live
2. We know the federation survives
3. I'm attached to the original characters and care about them but won't care about this unknown 20 something with an attitude
4. We all know they are going to pick a bunch of beautiful people to play the roles which is more unrealistic then star trek itself
5. What makes star trek so good are the bonds between the characters on the show, familiarity
6. You know they are going to have to make the Klingons bad guys because of the time period but I've gotten used to them being a allies.
Honestly if they want to go back in time they should base it on some unknowns rather than people we already know about. At least then I wouldn't be annoyed at this false representation of characters I know plus there would be the suspense of not knowing their future. You would have thought they had learned from Enterprise that going back in time is not a good idea. Honestly these people who own the ST franchise don't seem to understand what ST is all about. In the end, I look forward to any ST move but I don't think going back in time will do well. Hate to be negative but that's just the way I see it.
First of all I think anything installed would quickly be found and be the end of lanovo. secondly If they are going to have this kind of view then they will have to look at all brands of computers like Dell or Gateway because I bet you at least some of the parts (if not all) came from a foreign source. Personally this sounds like a bad press move by a competitor to ruin Lanovo because they make such a good product....
"There are certain tasks (i.e. anything that happens in the data centers) that I don't have the access to do. Even a simple task, like installing more memory in a non-production server, can take nine months and massive mountains of paperwork (no exaggeration), thus costing many times more than it should."
The first thought is simple, It's not your job!
The unfortunate consequence to working in a professional environment is excepting you job role. There are many instances of people working in one department yet having the skills of another. If we all moved in to some kind of independent work environment of "I can do that too, therefore why should I wait"then office anarchy would form and production would drop far below what you are facing now.
Second thought is, if I do it for you I have to do it for everyone.
You claim that a simple task of installing memory shouldn't take so long. Did you consider the responsibilities that the IT department might be faced with concerning an equal level of service. Or did you think of how it might fit into their budget.
You work for a large company, therefore I have to assume you are not only one making that request. If your IT department bypassed any kind of procedure and simply gave everyone the ram requested. I would think the number of request would be constant regardless of the true need. This in itself would be financially irresponsible to the company. Not to mention most expected results for increased memory achieve very little job performance improvements, thus making the whole thing a true waste of money. Also, providing one person memory might sound cheep, but doing it for 100, 200, 1000 people get very expensive.
So in the end who does the IT department pick when asked for increased memory? There has to be a procedure to show that they are being responsible when spending money, and they have to show that said money was spent wisely. In the end this equals paperwork and your hated bureaucracy. You don't know how many people requested ram, or the IT departments budget situation. If it took 9 months for you to get ram I would venture to guess that ether they couldn't provide it or you failed to provide a true need.
In the end I think your pointing at IT as an overwhelming bureaucracy is short sighted and smells of inexperience. You need to look at the bigger picture and realize that every department has it's problems and responsibilities.
Slashdot Mirror
that support DRM in that list as well. Politicians react to pressure a lot faster than big wigs in a company.
Is these people don't seem to understand the befits of a PDF...
I'm sure the chairs would breath a sigh of relief
to the point where you don't even want to turn on the computer.
"This is a fictional example of where things are going"
User: click to open word
Vista: are you sure you want to do that
user: click yes
Vista: are you absolutely sure you want to open this program
user: click yes mumble mumble
Vista: Warning this program has the capability of running macro viruses
user: click ok, like I didn't know that
Vista: do you want to see this warning again
user: click no
Vista: Are you sure
user: click yes, ggrrrr
Vista: Word opens
Vista: There is a new security update for this software would you like to install it now
user: what the, Click no
Vista: are you sure this is very unsafe!
user: oh for the love of Pete where's my pen and paper!!
Microsoft: Yet another user saved from themselves!
seriously, once you go to hdd you're pretty much a computer. Silly thing is for the prices we are seeing it's getting to the point of why bother with the console when you can get the computer for the same price.
Then again this is why MS got in the game, they see the PlayStation as a threat to the windows OS. Once you can plug in a printer, run office apps, send email, and browse the web on a PlayStation why bother with a IBM clone. Big problem for Sony is they need to keep the price down to make it more sensible to buy the "console" instead of the "computer".
Average things you do with a computer
play games
Email
Office Apps
Browse the Web
Things you do with a Console
Play games
Add those other three things and a large part of the population will say "I need that computer why?". Actually come to think of it, get a browser working and hook up with gmail and you cover a large portion of the big 3.
If someone had a certain item stolen and then looked in your window and saw that similar item in your house, they do not have the right to break down your door and check the serial # to make sure it isn't theirs. Yet for some reason big software companies have to right to invade my personal property (my computer) to verify that I actually own the software. This totally bypasses our entire legal system and our constitution and I have no idea why they are getting away with it.
Yes!! I second that! We have 95% of our users on just user rights and the biggest problem is software. There has been one or two software packages that I couldn't get around the "Need Administrator rights to run" problem. It amazes me how both MS and other software companies have a blatant disregard for this major security issue!
Let say: A knife you can use a knife to cut something or spread you butter on your crumpet or You can use a knife to stab someone to death so do you make the knife illegal simply because it can be used for a bad purpose? Same goes with software....
"It's hard AND DANGEROUS to install new programs on Windows platforms" Give me a break, are you telling me you have a hard time clicking the next button??!!?
It's not easy to install most software and when you do manage to install the software most still don't show up in the programs list. The average user relies icons not the command line that's where windows has you beat. I'm a computer professional and I like Linux and it's abilities, but there is no way my mom or dad could use it as far as installing new programs goes.
And there are several, was that people should have never been allowed to save a document in their perspective mailboxes. Any documents should have been automatically saved in some form of folder on a file server.
When you live in a society that advertises to kids that playing some sport is more important than learning or creating something new. It's even worse when some guy who runs around throwing a ball to another guy makes millions while your average computer person (who has spend around 100k going to school for 4 years) will maybe make it to middle class after 5 more years of working in their chosen profession. I'd have to say what pisses me off the most is that some white trash chick like Britney Spears can become one of the most popular with our kids simply because the RIAA uses her looks and sexuality to sell CD's. Hell, it's not even about the music anymore. Basically we tell our kids it's more important to be pretty or famous than to be smart and hard working.
LMAO Good question! But apparently so!
was Kirk Scottish?!? LOL
My guess would be the human form, maybe they were trying to create a human form that would fit in as a spy ;) Purely speculation on my part though LOL
Actually there was an episode involving worf that hit on that. I think data or someone asked him why they looked like that and he said it was an embarrassing experiment gone wrong or something like that LOL
1. you already know they are going to live
2. We know the federation survives
3. I'm attached to the original characters and care about them but won't care about this unknown 20 something with an attitude
4. We all know they are going to pick a bunch of beautiful people to play the roles which is more unrealistic then star trek itself
5. What makes star trek so good are the bonds between the characters on the show, familiarity
6. You know they are going to have to make the Klingons bad guys because of the time period but I've gotten used to them being a allies.
Honestly if they want to go back in time they should base it on some unknowns rather than people we already know about. At least then I wouldn't be annoyed at this false representation of characters I know plus there would be the suspense of not knowing their future. You would have thought they had learned from Enterprise that going back in time is not a good idea. Honestly these people who own the ST franchise don't seem to understand what ST is all about. In the end, I look forward to any ST move but I don't think going back in time will do well. Hate to be negative but that's just the way I see it.
First of all I think anything installed would quickly be found and be the end of lanovo. secondly If they are going to have this kind of view then they will have to look at all brands of computers like Dell or Gateway because I bet you at least some of the parts (if not all) came from a foreign source. Personally this sounds like a bad press move by a competitor to ruin Lanovo because they make such a good product....
I've been waiting for this
"There are certain tasks (i.e. anything that happens in the data centers) that I don't have the access to do. Even a simple task, like installing more memory in a non-production server, can take nine months and massive mountains of paperwork (no exaggeration), thus costing many times more than it should." The first thought is simple, It's not your job! The unfortunate consequence to working in a professional environment is excepting you job role. There are many instances of people working in one department yet having the skills of another. If we all moved in to some kind of independent work environment of "I can do that too, therefore why should I wait"then office anarchy would form and production would drop far below what you are facing now. Second thought is, if I do it for you I have to do it for everyone. You claim that a simple task of installing memory shouldn't take so long. Did you consider the responsibilities that the IT department might be faced with concerning an equal level of service. Or did you think of how it might fit into their budget. You work for a large company, therefore I have to assume you are not only one making that request. If your IT department bypassed any kind of procedure and simply gave everyone the ram requested. I would think the number of request would be constant regardless of the true need. This in itself would be financially irresponsible to the company. Not to mention most expected results for increased memory achieve very little job performance improvements, thus making the whole thing a true waste of money. Also, providing one person memory might sound cheep, but doing it for 100, 200, 1000 people get very expensive. So in the end who does the IT department pick when asked for increased memory? There has to be a procedure to show that they are being responsible when spending money, and they have to show that said money was spent wisely. In the end this equals paperwork and your hated bureaucracy. You don't know how many people requested ram, or the IT departments budget situation. If it took 9 months for you to get ram I would venture to guess that ether they couldn't provide it or you failed to provide a true need. In the end I think your pointing at IT as an overwhelming bureaucracy is short sighted and smells of inexperience. You need to look at the bigger picture and realize that every department has it's problems and responsibilities.