FWIW and from what I heard they supposedly made is run better with less. I herd better then Vista did because Microsoft was a little miffed at all the new netbooks that had XP installed becuase Vista wasn't usable on them because of lower hardware specs. Considering the benchmarks it sounds plausible since 7 was coming close to XP, but seeing is believing.
If you live in a urban area would use of public transportation be better for all the reason you put forth????
A electric car is great and all, just the benefits and drawbacks don't seem to be clear to the majority of people.
Petroleum product most times are still used in electric vehicles for lubrication of moving parts unless people hunt down product that are non-petroleum based & can stand up like petroleum based products do, also is the manufacturer warranty would still stand after the use of these non-standard products.
Then you also have to consider if a person used public transportation, with all the people using it would that cause less smog then if all were charging cars off a electric grind that is powered by coal, oil, natural gas, etc. etc..... If it was all power from hydro-electric that would be one thing, but we all know it's not, so all and all I would say it's not a clear case for electric vehicles being the end all be all.
What? The competition that was already there? Sony, nintendo, and sega, to name a few where there long before microsoft forced it's way in. Your about 10 years off on the competition thing because it started in mid 90's when the playstation, N64, and short lived Saturn where around and continues to this day. That's what lit the flame, not MS's arrival. I wasn't saying anything to which system is better, because I think most, over the years, have had features that make them interesting. MS came in at the 11th hour to compete, and they have done pretty well considering when they jumped in to the fray. Their XBOX Live was something, but that would have happened on another system sooner or latter and the same can be said for HDD's in game systems. I just don't see them as a spark of competition because Sony employed most all the tactics Microsoft has used. Each have contributed equally to the competition but it would have been there regardless of Microsoft's entry to the console market.
Oh yea, 18 dollar music CD's that where 5 dollars two years ago, but that's more the RIAA. Still the RIAA is one of the forces that tries hardest to subvert and twist DMCA law to their own liking, which is reason enough not to like either!
Game selection? What games can be directly attributed to XBOX? Gaylo.... I mean Halo? Yea that's a real explosion there! Really, what games has X-BOX popularized that was exclusive? For most of the original X-BOX's run games usually got ported after PS2 and Gamecube already had them. I loved what X-BOX brought to the table each time, but really, It has never really had a killer app, regardless of how much Halo was marketed and pushed to no end. In the end, it had really nothing new to offer in a gaming experience.
I think this is just another group of very few that try to force their will on all who listen. They get a hell of a lot more press then they deserve. I picture a group of 20 or less and the media plays it like they are thousands strong.
I think where you failed to look is that all (most all without tinkering, some with) programs that I and others ran in W2k, Wnt, W98se, and ME could run in XP. Not so with a lot of software in Vista. That's the main reason the business community will not be upgrading. Why should they if the cost of Vista approved software will cost them $1000 or more per computer.
Same goes for a lot of consumers. I want ALL my software to run. Not some that, after researching their website, say "HEY we have a new version that you can buy to work on Vista!". In the times we are in (economically) I don't think knowledgeable consumers will switch if they figure the cost might be more then just the machine and os.
I read it and thought it was a BSA red dot scope that had gotten the gaze of the slashdot eye. They are a lot cooler then the business software alliance, and would be a great tool for any boy scout in the wilderness.
Oh yea that's what they did, they adopted a couple pieces of open source software as their major plan to retain the top spot.
Next I hear they will be offering de-caf at dealerships because they looked in the "rear view" and saw toyota passing ford!! Whew, those crazy General Motors!!!!
You had me till the "wind" comments. Everything I've heard about wind ends with that it is not very efficient.
I'm not here to support nuclear, but solar panels across America and turbine fields sound a little unrealistic.
And what's with the 1,000 years? So you want something now that will be viable for 1,000 years? Man, that's a long time considering how much technology could change in 200 years, let alone 1,000. Btw, I didn't recall the article calling for thousands of reactor to be built across the US considering the research group isn't even US based.
RIAA:"It's 70 cents for the song and $749.30 in cost of PR for restoring faith of our customers/artists/record labels"
Judge:Are you sure?
RIAA: "Ok, it's really 70 cents for the song, $749 for lawyers and $.30 in PR"
Judge: Come on now?
RIAA: "Alright, it's $.03 for the song, $200 for lawyers and $549.97 for your reelection campaign and all the free downloads of "The Gap Band" you can handle? How's that sound judge? Judge? Judge? Is this thing on?"
Yea, how dare they say that radiation doesn't kill as many people as was reported, because reporters never embellish anything.
It's time to blame: insert name
bush
republicans
the illuminate
big nuclear
big business
because they want to make money off nuclear power since they funded the study. Greenpeace told me so and they never lie....er, embellish either! They didn't say radiation is good for you, didn't say you should shower in it, just that studies of effects don't jive with reports. Now can someone come up with a REAL reason that this study is bunk? Maybe some REAL connection between nuclear plants and the research group?
Wouldn't it be smart to assume that if these business owner treated their employees a little better and not belittle or possibly not under pay that they would probably not get reported to the BSA if they didn't have enough licenses or are using pirated software?
I worked for a company that treated me fairly, purchased necessary items I needed to secure/support the network and showed a care for it's employees that is rare in business sometimes. I'm sure they have some violations that the BSA might consider wrong and would want to pursue, but I wouldn't think of turning them in because of the good treatment I received from them. They had to give me a layoff because of slowing work, and could do so with how stable I made their (before I was employed) unstable network but I feel no Ill will toward them, they had to do it to survive. The general manager still calls from time to time to see how I'm doing or if they have a problem. They pay for me to come out and fix the problems, but I'm not getting rich off them. I do it because of the fair treatment I received and because I know they are in tough times going from 200+ employees to around 15.
Now go to my last employer. He treated me like crap. He was irrational in his demands, thought process, and business techniques, to top it all off a childish behavior. When I first started working for him he acted like the sky was the limit but delivered nothing. He had major issues relating to his height and would try to belittle anyone he could, later claiming he could do such things because he's "the boss". If he was violating any licenses or using pirated software I wouldn't hesitate to turn his butt in because he needs quite a few lessons in what it takes to make a business successful.
So when the article says that people know or suspect former employees it is no doubt that they can figure it out because they know how they treated that employee. It's their conscious that tells them who turned them in.
It sounds like a case of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", or if that's to religious, "What comes around, goes around".
Have you not used Vista?Great wasn't the word I would pick to describe it. ME v.2.0 maybe, but surly not great.
Ok maybe it is great, because since it came out I've gotten more business taking it off oem's and replacing it with XP. Thank you Microsoft!
Slashdot Mirror
FWIW and from what I heard they supposedly made is run better with less. I herd better then Vista did because Microsoft was a little miffed at all the new netbooks that had XP installed becuase Vista wasn't usable on them because of lower hardware specs. Considering the benchmarks it sounds plausible since 7 was coming close to XP, but seeing is believing.
If you live in a urban area would use of public transportation be better for all the reason you put forth????
A electric car is great and all, just the benefits and drawbacks don't seem to be clear to the majority of people.
Petroleum product most times are still used in electric vehicles for lubrication of moving parts unless people hunt down product that are non-petroleum based & can stand up like petroleum based products do, also is the manufacturer warranty would still stand after the use of these non-standard products.
Then you also have to consider if a person used public transportation, with all the people using it would that cause less smog then if all were charging cars off a electric grind that is powered by coal, oil, natural gas, etc. etc..... If it was all power from hydro-electric that would be one thing, but we all know it's not, so all and all I would say it's not a clear case for electric vehicles being the end all be all.
What? The competition that was already there? Sony, nintendo, and sega, to name a few where there long before microsoft forced it's way in. Your about 10 years off on the competition thing because it started in mid 90's when the playstation, N64, and short lived Saturn where around and continues to this day. That's what lit the flame, not MS's arrival. I wasn't saying anything to which system is better, because I think most, over the years, have had features that make them interesting. MS came in at the 11th hour to compete, and they have done pretty well considering when they jumped in to the fray. Their XBOX Live was something, but that would have happened on another system sooner or latter and the same can be said for HDD's in game systems. I just don't see them as a spark of competition because Sony employed most all the tactics Microsoft has used. Each have contributed equally to the competition but it would have been there regardless of Microsoft's entry to the console market.
Oh yea, 18 dollar music CD's that where 5 dollars two years ago, but that's more the RIAA. Still the RIAA is one of the forces that tries hardest to subvert and twist DMCA law to their own liking, which is reason enough not to like either!
Good ideas? We're talking about DMCA right? Isn't DMCA and good idea like a oxymoron?
If you like having media corporations run free over any ounce of rights you have with laws that encourage them doing so, then there is your good idea!
Game selection? What games can be directly attributed to XBOX? Gaylo.... I mean Halo? Yea that's a real explosion there! Really, what games has X-BOX popularized that was exclusive? For most of the original X-BOX's run games usually got ported after PS2 and Gamecube already had them. I loved what X-BOX brought to the table each time, but really, It has never really had a killer app, regardless of how much Halo was marketed and pushed to no end. In the end, it had really nothing new to offer in a gaming experience.
I think this is just another group of very few that try to force their will on all who listen. They get a hell of a lot more press then they deserve. I picture a group of 20 or less and the media plays it like they are thousands strong.
Yea Democrats would never do that! They would go to anal rape prison because it's their civic duty.
Anal rape and duty in the same sentence? That's got to be a first!
I think where you failed to look is that all (most all without tinkering, some with) programs that I and others ran in W2k, Wnt, W98se, and ME could run in XP. Not so with a lot of software in Vista. That's the main reason the business community will not be upgrading. Why should they if the cost of Vista approved software will cost them $1000 or more per computer.
Same goes for a lot of consumers. I want ALL my software to run. Not some that, after researching their website, say "HEY we have a new version that you can buy to work on Vista!". In the times we are in (economically) I don't think knowledgeable consumers will switch if they figure the cost might be more then just the machine and os.
I blame you, high fructose corn syrup! You taste just like you smell, delicious!
I read it and thought it was a BSA red dot scope that had gotten the gaze of the slashdot eye. They are a lot cooler then the business software alliance, and would be a great tool for any boy scout in the wilderness.
$18.99? WTF! Where the hell you getting your CD's at? You sir need to shop around.
Oh yea, the record industry brought this on them selfs. Lets hear them say how ease of isn't important to consumers.
Oh yea that's what they did, they adopted a couple pieces of open source software as their major plan to retain the top spot.
Next I hear they will be offering de-caf at dealerships because they looked in the "rear view" and saw toyota passing ford!!
Whew, those crazy General Motors!!!!
Whoever posted the wiki on it didn't really help your statement, whatever it was meant to infer.
So yeah, the tag rtfa or maybe READ something about what your posting is about right.
Can we get some of these CATASTROPHIC converters for the troops in Iraq, CATALYTICally speaking?
You had me till the "wind" comments. Everything I've heard about wind ends with that it is not very efficient.
I'm not here to support nuclear, but solar panels across America and turbine fields sound a little unrealistic.
And what's with the 1,000 years? So you want something now that will be viable for 1,000 years? Man, that's a long time considering how much technology could change in 200 years, let alone 1,000. Btw, I didn't recall the article calling for thousands of reactor to be built across the US considering the research group isn't even US based.
RIAA:"It's 70 cents for the song and $749.30 in cost of PR for restoring faith of our customers/artists/record labels"
Judge:Are you sure?
RIAA: "Ok, it's really 70 cents for the song, $749 for lawyers and $.30 in PR"
Judge: Come on now?
RIAA: "Alright, it's $.03 for the song, $200 for lawyers and $549.97 for your reelection campaign and all the free downloads of "The Gap Band" you can handle? How's that sound judge? Judge? Judge? Is this thing on?"
It's time to blame
- bush
- republicans
- the illuminate
- big nuclear
- big business
because they want to make money off nuclear power since they funded the study. Greenpeace told me so and they never lie....er, embellish either!They didn't say radiation is good for you, didn't say you should shower in it, just that studies of effects don't jive with reports.
Now can someone come up with a REAL reason that this study is bunk? Maybe some REAL connection between nuclear plants and the research group?
Wouldn't it be smart to assume that if these business owner treated their employees a little better and not belittle or possibly not under pay that they would probably not get reported to the BSA if they didn't have enough licenses or are using pirated software?
I worked for a company that treated me fairly, purchased necessary items I needed to secure/support the network and showed a care for it's employees that is rare in business sometimes. I'm sure they have some violations that the BSA might consider wrong and would want to pursue, but I wouldn't think of turning them in because of the good treatment I received from them. They had to give me a layoff because of slowing work, and could do so with how stable I made their (before I was employed) unstable network but I feel no Ill will toward them, they had to do it to survive. The general manager still calls from time to time to see how I'm doing or if they have a problem. They pay for me to come out and fix the problems, but I'm not getting rich off them. I do it because of the fair treatment I received and because I know they are in tough times going from 200+ employees to around 15.
Now go to my last employer. He treated me like crap. He was irrational in his demands, thought process, and business techniques, to top it all off a childish behavior. When I first started working for him he acted like the sky was the limit but delivered nothing. He had major issues relating to his height and would try to belittle anyone he could, later claiming he could do such things because he's "the boss". If he was violating any licenses or using pirated software I wouldn't hesitate to turn his butt in because he needs quite a few lessons in what it takes to make a business successful.
So when the article says that people know or suspect former employees it is no doubt that they can figure it out because they know how they treated that employee. It's their conscious that tells them who turned them in.
It sounds like a case of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", or if that's to religious, "What comes around, goes around".
Have you not used Vista?Great wasn't the word I would pick to describe it. ME v.2.0 maybe, but surly not great. Ok maybe it is great, because since it came out I've gotten more business taking it off oem's and replacing it with XP. Thank you Microsoft!
Interesting. Tell us more?
side note: is html not one of those languages?
I think I would go through 10 or more 9 volts a year with mine.
Still works though!
So not only did he hack Voip, but he did a spot for Geico in his press conference? F'n sellout!
Well I don't see anything wrong with the censoring of crack.Crack kills!
Yea thanks for clearing that up cap'n blame the US. BTW what is "the own trade"? How the hell does that get a five?