Actually, it just needs boatloads of RAM in the classic interface, can be average. You only need a good GFX card and a powerful CPU in Aero...
But, if you do have those boatloads of RAM, Vista can be faster than XP. The turnaround point, according to some tests I've seen, is between the 1 and 1.5GB mark, varying on the apps you use.
Actually, I think the default GUI on any OS I've used looks attrocious, but I find I can take Widows and KDE (ok, the latter isn't an OS, but it can work on many!) and make them look good with minimal effort.
That point is so much more accurate than you may realize.
So much gaming is done through MS, via Windows or XBox360...
By providing GPU access, even in binary form, to the PS3/Linux system... They are taking a cheap and simple pot-shot at MS that has the potential to be quite effective.
Actually, the answer in that was an implicit "never in hell"
He mentioned a strong desire to protect their investment and IP. Given that money for the system comes from licensing of the games and the movies from their manufacturers, that response amounts to the answer I gave. That is, unless the creators pay royalties to Sony. If they do not pay royalties, then they simply provide less incentive for people to buy products from the companies who do pay said royalties.
Countering the first obvious argument that will probably come up - yes the homebrewed may not cost money, and thus not compete in the players pocketbook, but they do take time to play, and if a player doesn't thing he or she will have enough time for all the games he or she might like to play, some may not be purchased, or may be purchased more warily (say by trying them at a friends house first, and/or a rental at a blockbuster). If they had more time, they might buy a game tested, that they wouldn't with less time.
Given the smug "it's so secure" comments from Mac users, I would agree the 'haha' would be appropriate. However, defectivebydesign insinuates that it is intended to be problematic or broken, and is not appropriate in this case. It's not appropriate in similar cases on MS news articles either, but/. is hardly an unbiased group. Additonally, many people want to lash out at MS, making them a good target. Few people care enough about Apple to give a damn.
- Where is my quick-access-but-not-a-desktop-icon method of launching an app? Mac OS has had one for over a decade. There were pop-up folders (tabs), tabbed launch apps, and now there's the Dock (though I prefer the old categorized tabs, myself). Even Windows, that paragon of UI anti-design, has Quick Launch bars. I guess you could call the hierarchic menu a "fast launch" menu, since it's still faster than manually navigating to the folder and running the app or typing the path/app into a CLI. But I never considered that a quick-access method on Mac OS even when you could stick stuff into the Apple menu. Hierarchic menus are just too finicky... OH WAIT. There it is. Sorry, but there's a reason that the Mac mouse was one-button for all those years, even in the face of heavy criticism. Relying on a right-click for what should be basic system functions is just poor practice. I've been running Ubuntu for a while now, and this screenshot was the first I'd seen of the aforementioned feature.
"Fairly trivial" overstates how difficult it is to add one of these to ubuntu, but you were talking about by default - get kubuntu, and I believe you'll have this by default, no problem.
- A system-wide menubar is really a nice thing. You can't click another app's menus without switching to that app anyway, so why even give the option? Plus, it frees up screen real-estate for other things. You'd be amazed how much space is wasted by all those menubars, especially the ones that consist of just File, Edit, View. Move all that crap to one place. And yes, I do understand that it takes some getting-used-to and that people are resistant to change. Especially Linux geeks. Try it for a month and I'll guarantee you won't go back. It's the same challenge we all issue to Windows users, and what's good for the goose...
If you are visually impared, or have your mouse set to move more slowly, this can be extremely painful/tedious (or simply have multiple applications up that aren't near the top of the screen and don't want to always have to move the mouse up to the top). And Mac OS doesn't have the option to turn it off. So in both cases, this is a disadvantage, not because it is there or not there, but because the option to change it isn't there.
As far as aesthetics go, that's a matter of oppinion. I think brushed metal was probably the only good GUI style Apple had, I hated all the plasticky looking things. Likewise, I like the classic Windows look (XP/Vista is crap IMO). The problem is, saying appearance is "better" only counts for you, and no one else. That goes for what I said too: some people like the XP look or the Vista look. The only way you can really say that somethings looks are an advantage is if you have the ability to change them, because only then can you have an appeal to a truely large audience.
Antitrust suits, look what happened with free IE. Additionally, there's corporate mentality: if companies didn't have to pay for it, they wouldn't trust it.
actually he said that corporatism will fail for the same reason communism failed, he wasn't promoting communism at all.
And capitalism can fall into corporatism pretty easily if companies get the idea they can loan everything instead of sell it.
His points are valid, even if his argument lacks weigh (for example, I own everything of "mine" but the structure I live in - even that will change, minus mortgage, in a month or too)
Actually, this is a business class printer, not a home printer.
Which means it's not such a bad decision - businesses seem to like things like this, where the only responsibility to them is to have static per-page cost of the printer.
But, the $100 dollar laptop is designed to minimize price. Meaning it ships with the minimum resource-eating software required, meaning open source.
I've seen some pretty bloated open source systems, and some pretty compressed closed source systems.
Still, 400Mhz CPU + 128MB memory + 2GB disk space might be a tad much to ask for with $100.
And yes, I've seen XP pro, without mods, run relatively painlessly on such a setup (there was more disk space in the machine, but that was all it used.
sheesh, I need to calm down from being seriously annoyed before I write responses
so many typos and mistakes in that post...
Fact of the matter is, just because I disagree with you, doesn't make me a fanboi. Typically, one who cannot accept disagreement is a fanboi.
I never said that people couldn't like the Mac OS interface, I never said it was distinctly bad either - I simply said it is *NOT* what I in particular prefer, and I know there are others who do not like it as well.
actually, I'm neither a Linux fanboi (I hate the OS). However, Gnome, which the true idiot was complaining about (although she/he called them Linux for some reason), are actually cross platform, and you can even get them to run on your precious mac.
The fact of the matter is, I don't like the look and feel of the Mac Operating system (it's much better than it was pre OS X I grant you that). There are things it does well, there are things it does very well, and there are things it does poorly.
Example: The text the OP complained about not being lined up? It appears to be vertically centered as it's line up, not lined up by the top or bottom. This would make things with different line count seem not lined up, even though they are.
Oh yes, and here's a hint, if you want to make an argument, don't insult people who disagree with you, especially when they don't insult you - it hurts your case.
Funny, aside from the dijointed menu drop down on the Ubuntu screen shot, I find the Ubuntu looks much better. (Actually, KDE doesn't have that problem, just as a comparison - Actually, I'll take the look of KDE over OSX any day). I'll also keep my menu bars with my windows and not at the top of the screen, thanks.
There were no menu drop downs on the mac screen shot, but I know what those look like, and I know they are better done.
I didn't mean that as a flame, those are the reasons I use POP3.
I don't actually use my phone for mail, so that's never been a problem. I also have a relatively low mail volume on th eonly accounts I would check in multiple places, so I know what I've already read. Most of my conversations are still based on that thing I don't use for mail...
I agree, on the few times that I can find what I want in the FreeBSD documentation and mailing lists/archives, which is typically for userland problems, the GentooWiki is often where google takes me to find the answer. I have to change a couple of small commands, and device paths sometimes, but I'm familiar with both sides of the fence, so that really isn't a challange.
(1) each device will get a copy of the mail, so I'm not sure what "across devices" means (2) For decades, pretty much *every* mail client could sort mail into folders, locally (3) Most mail clients also have filters to auto-sort mail, which I have set up on each machine (4) All my mails are on all my machines, with minimal effort (5) My mails are not on the server for long where it's easier for a hacker to get to them (6) My mails are not on a server where they are taking up space and pissing off the admin.
Not really, I have my clients leave the mail on the server for 3+ days, depending on the server and the mail I get.
It keeps the server uncloged, and all my devices get my mail. The server is set to use encrypted transfer (including passwords), so it's secure as well.
actually, he was commenting on webmail as the competing factor, not Outlook.
Personally, on Windows, I use Outlook Express (set to not auto-preview emails), because thunderbird wasn't deleting mails from the server as it was supposed to (everything over 5 days old), and seemed to corrupt my mail local mail store every week or two (TBird 1.5). In BSD I use KMail.
Except you said there is no such thing as "internet crime" and that the internet is only the communication channel used for the crime.
That seems awfully semantic, when the internet being a channel for the crime is a valid classification (although I'll agree with you, it was not usefully used in that report).
As for the mirror statement, I had not argued something as being trivial simply due to it's minor semantic omissions.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, it just needs boatloads of RAM in the classic interface, can be average. You only need a good GFX card and a powerful CPU in Aero...
But, if you do have those boatloads of RAM, Vista can be faster than XP. The turnaround point, according to some tests I've seen, is between the 1 and 1.5GB mark, varying on the apps you use.
except some people think the MacGUI looks ugly.
Actually, I think the default GUI on any OS I've used looks attrocious, but I find I can take Widows and KDE (ok, the latter isn't an OS, but it can work on many!) and make them look good with minimal effort.
That point is so much more accurate than you may realize.
So much gaming is done through MS, via Windows or XBox360...
By providing GPU access, even in binary form, to the PS3/Linux system... They are taking a cheap and simple pot-shot at MS that has the potential to be quite effective.
heh, I was thinking: When did Cid/Sid work for Venezuela?
Actually, the answer in that was an implicit "never in hell"
He mentioned a strong desire to protect their investment and IP. Given that money for the system comes from licensing of the games and the movies from their manufacturers, that response amounts to the answer I gave. That is, unless the creators pay royalties to Sony. If they do not pay royalties, then they simply provide less incentive for people to buy products from the companies who do pay said royalties.
Countering the first obvious argument that will probably come up - yes the homebrewed may not cost money, and thus not compete in the players pocketbook, but they do take time to play, and if a player doesn't thing he or she will have enough time for all the games he or she might like to play, some may not be purchased, or may be purchased more warily (say by trying them at a friends house first, and/or a rental at a blockbuster). If they had more time, they might buy a game tested, that they wouldn't with less time.
Given the smug "it's so secure" comments from Mac users, I would agree the 'haha' would be appropriate. However, defectivebydesign insinuates that it is intended to be problematic or broken, and is not appropriate in this case. It's not appropriate in similar cases on MS news articles either, but /. is hardly an unbiased group. Additonally, many people want to lash out at MS, making them a good target. Few people care enough about Apple to give a damn.
Some of them don't have internet access (or at least not regural access).
Yep, dropping dead-tree distribution definetly expands their user base over having both available.
"Fairly trivial" overstates how difficult it is to add one of these to ubuntu, but you were talking about by default - get kubuntu, and I believe you'll have this by default, no problem.
If you are visually impared, or have your mouse set to move more slowly, this can be extremely painful/tedious (or simply have multiple applications up that aren't near the top of the screen and don't want to always have to move the mouse up to the top). And Mac OS doesn't have the option to turn it off. So in both cases, this is a disadvantage, not because it is there or not there, but because the option to change it isn't there.
As far as aesthetics go, that's a matter of oppinion. I think brushed metal was probably the only good GUI style Apple had, I hated all the plasticky looking things. Likewise, I like the classic Windows look (XP/Vista is crap IMO). The problem is, saying appearance is "better" only counts for you, and no one else. That goes for what I said too: some people like the XP look or the Vista look. The only way you can really say that somethings looks are an advantage is if you have the ability to change them, because only then can you have an appeal to a truely large audience.
Glad I didn't post that for a redundant mod.
It's exactly what I thought when reading the TFS/TFA
Antitrust suits, look what happened with free IE.
Additionally, there's corporate mentality: if companies didn't have to pay for it, they wouldn't trust it.
actually he said that corporatism will fail for the same reason communism failed, he wasn't promoting communism at all.
And capitalism can fall into corporatism pretty easily if companies get the idea they can loan everything instead of sell it.
His points are valid, even if his argument lacks weigh (for example, I own everything of "mine" but the structure I live in - even that will change, minus mortgage, in a month or too)
Actually, this is a business class printer, not a home printer.
Which means it's not such a bad decision - businesses seem to like things like this, where the only responsibility to them is to have static per-page cost of the printer.
Or is that included in the per page price?
Why not just up the price of the printer or just not lower the price of the carts? (or lower them less than the manufacturing cost is lowered).
Ex: Old cart cost $100, but was $5 to make. New cart is $97 but costs $1 to make.
But, the $100 dollar laptop is designed to minimize price. Meaning it ships with the minimum resource-eating software required, meaning open source.
I've seen some pretty bloated open source systems, and some pretty compressed closed source systems.
Still, 400Mhz CPU + 128MB memory + 2GB disk space might be a tad much to ask for with $100.
And yes, I've seen XP pro, without mods, run relatively painlessly on such a setup (there was more disk space in the machine, but that was all it used.
sheesh, I need to calm down from being seriously annoyed before I write responses
so many typos and mistakes in that post...
Fact of the matter is, just because I disagree with you, doesn't make me a fanboi. Typically, one who cannot accept disagreement is a fanboi.
I never said that people couldn't like the Mac OS interface, I never said it was distinctly bad either - I simply said it is *NOT* what I in particular prefer, and I know there are others who do not like it as well.
actually, I'm neither a Linux fanboi (I hate the OS). However, Gnome, which the true idiot was complaining about (although she/he called them Linux for some reason), are actually cross platform, and you can even get them to run on your precious mac.
The fact of the matter is, I don't like the look and feel of the Mac Operating system (it's much better than it was pre OS X I grant you that). There are things it does well, there are things it does very well, and there are things it does poorly.
Example: The text the OP complained about not being lined up? It appears to be vertically centered as it's line up, not lined up by the top or bottom. This would make things with different line count seem not lined up, even though they are.
Oh yes, and here's a hint, if you want to make an argument, don't insult people who disagree with you, especially when they don't insult you - it hurts your case.
Funny, aside from the dijointed menu drop down on the Ubuntu screen shot, I find the Ubuntu looks much better. (Actually, KDE doesn't have that problem, just as a comparison - Actually, I'll take the look of KDE over OSX any day). I'll also keep my menu bars with my windows and not at the top of the screen, thanks.
There were no menu drop downs on the mac screen shot, but I know what those look like, and I know they are better done.
I didn't mean that as a flame, those are the reasons I use POP3.
I don't actually use my phone for mail, so that's never been a problem. I also have a relatively low mail volume on th eonly accounts I would check in multiple places, so I know what I've already read. Most of my conversations are still based on that thing I don't use for mail...
typo: s/can/can't/
I agree, on the few times that I can find what I want in the FreeBSD documentation and mailing lists/archives, which is typically for userland problems, the GentooWiki is often where google takes me to find the answer. I have to change a couple of small commands, and device paths sometimes, but I'm familiar with both sides of the fence, so that really isn't a challange.
(1) each device will get a copy of the mail, so I'm not sure what "across devices" means
(2) For decades, pretty much *every* mail client could sort mail into folders, locally
(3) Most mail clients also have filters to auto-sort mail, which I have set up on each machine
(4) All my mails are on all my machines, with minimal effort
(5) My mails are not on the server for long where it's easier for a hacker to get to them
(6) My mails are not on a server where they are taking up space and pissing off the admin.
Not really, I have my clients leave the mail on the server for 3+ days, depending on the server and the mail I get.
It keeps the server uncloged, and all my devices get my mail. The server is set to use encrypted transfer (including passwords), so it's secure as well.
actually, he was commenting on webmail as the competing factor, not Outlook.
Personally, on Windows, I use Outlook Express (set to not auto-preview emails), because thunderbird wasn't deleting mails from the server as it was supposed to (everything over 5 days old), and seemed to corrupt my mail local mail store every week or two (TBird 1.5). In BSD I use KMail.
I'd say about 2/3rds of the people I know who aren't /.ers
/also/ have webmail, but not all of them.
many of them
Except you said there is no such thing as "internet crime" and that the internet is only the communication channel used for the crime.
That seems awfully semantic, when the internet being a channel for the crime is a valid classification (although I'll agree with you, it was not usefully used in that report).
As for the mirror statement, I had not argued something as being trivial simply due to it's minor semantic omissions.