Forced Obsolescence is ridiculous. Microsoft already makes enough money overcharging for what time after time is a mediocre product. Heres a concept: What if instead of forcing users to upgrade their machines and install new versions of their software every year, they made a single unified kernel that was easily updated and a consistent interface that users could keep and customize, and even have some choice in the look, design and behavior, that they could carry over to a new machine when they were ready without any loss or requiring fancy updates and reinstalls, etc. Oh yeah, that would be Linux. But then I guess they couldn't afford to copy and steal all the ideas that everyone else comes up with first and then bastardize them... It takes a lot of victimization to be able to afford to put hundreds of millions of dollars behind something like the surface:(
Saying that "Windows is fine" is almost irresponsible. A straight plain windows install with no other software and no internet connection is not fine. Windows still crashes easily... I could go on and on about it, but before someone replies with a counter argument, let me just say that if my computer reboots and I don't expect it to, that either means my UPS ran out of juice during a blackout, or else I just cooked some component on my motherboard, and its safe to say that neither of those happen too often, so basically, I reboot about once a year, for the purposes of a kernel upgrade or a hardware upgrade. Any more than that irritates me. Make that argument for a windows machine, I dare you... Sony, IE or any other single entity is not to blame. It is a failure to write stable software, point blank and period.
You know, as it can take anywhere from 6 months to 10 years for a patent application to get filed and all, you have to wonder exactly how efficient the USPTO really is... I know the government isn't famous for picking up their feet, but with todays computer technology, you'd think that of anyone, the USPTO would have it down to (ahem), a science.
Exactly what I'm getting at. M*crosoft makes money by shoving in your face, and forcing you to deal with it. Google makes money by actually providing something useful... Its an interesting puzzle to wonder, would m*crosoft make more money because they can shove a popup in front of 9/10ths of the planet, or google, because people actually click their link ads because they want them? I wonder what would happen if google teamed up with sites like ebay, and the OSDN... I bet b*llgates (yes, thats one word) and steve ballmer would dirty their pants.
You know, I hate internet ads as much as the next guy. I realize that without them, site like slashdot couldn't survive, but honestly, I don't click on banner ads unless I'm REALLY looking for the particular product/service in that ad, which doesn't happen too often... Recently, I finally set up my http://www.google.com/ homepage... Interesting service for those of you who haven't set it up yet... Frankly, my browser has pointed to a blank page for years... This is the first time I can think of since netscape navigator went down the toilet that I've actually set a homepage in my browser, and the reason is simple: A google homepage is simple, nonintrusive, and USEFUL... If either m*crosoft or AOL could come up with a service or utility that I could say the same about, I wouldn't be so objectionable just because of the source, but the point I was originally going to get at remains the same: I click on google ads because they relate to what I need. Every ad I see from m*crosoft or AOL or pretty much most any other site is intrusive, unwanted, and usually unrelated to anything I'm looking for. It doesn't matter how many of their services they combine, they're not going to generate more clicks from me. If as many people feel like I do, I don't think this tactic is anything more than a propaganda technique designed to appease stockholders.
I think the more pertinent point is that its not knowledge that fuels the game, it is imagination. If one requires schooling or education in order to use imagination, the game is wasted. If all you can see are the numbers, you fail to respect the ultimate entertainment of the game. I do not play D&D, and other than sitting in on maybe a few games in old memory, I will admit I am probably the least qualified person I know of to reflect on the game, however, I do play many games, and I see the same problem across the board. People no longer play games for the simple purpose of entertainment, or even just the benefit of spending time with friends... Why does everything have to come to some kind of competition that requires years of training and focus? Can't we just play games and have fun without all the hype?
My first REAL linux distro was Slackware. I believe, as I recall, Slackware 96 that I bought at a bookstore... But thats beside the point... I do not run a massive server cluster, or administrate a huge network. I use Linux on my home computer basically, because I hate microsoft with a burning rage and hatred, and because Unix does what I need it to when I need it to do it. Usually, that means running a web server so I can build and test pages on my computer rather than have to upload them to a site just to find out what I need to fix, or running an IRC client for excessively long periods of time (ehh, forever?). The point is that I use slackware because thats what I really learned unix off of. Granted, I don't think I ever even bothered to install X11 until the turn of the millenium, because I started out with a 486 DX/2 and a 1MB video card that couldn't barely handle windowmaker, much less anything more system intensive, so I spent most of my time in CLI, and when I finally got frusterated with vi, I figured out that pico and jed were very effective tools for modifying the many files I found in/etc, which inevitably is what I believe led to my unix addiction.
So to summarize this whole stupid story, I don't go as far as most gurus to argue with other linux users about which distro is best. I've used plenty of others over the years, whether that was redhat or debian or suse, and I've even used other unix flavors like FreeBSD and OSX (don't laugh. Its worth the knowledge). I think that its really a matter of user preference. If I like slackware because it is such a raw installation, thats MY preference. If someone else likes redhat because of its graphical interface, or because RPM is convenient, that doesn't make one distro more or less useful than the other.
I think it is very rude of someone to accuse a distro of being outdated, or no longer useful simply because it is not to their liking or preference. I may hate microsoft and specifically dislike windows for reasons which would take the next 10 pages to list, but that is not reason for me to go tell every windows user on the planet that their preference is wrong. Frankly, MOST people wouldn't be able to handle the workings of even a minor linux distro like lindows, much less a full blown unix installation, nor should they have to. Windows, as much as I may dislike it and consider it useless, is appropriate for the vast majority of those people. Before anyone else goes off accusing slackware or ANY OTHER distro or software of being useless should consider the point of view of people who use such software before making any judgements, and remember that we're not in competition with each other. We need to support each other if this is going to succeed.
Slashdot Mirror
What the hell. I'd vote for McAfee before I vote for Trump. If Trump can run, why not McAfee?
Forced Obsolescence is ridiculous. Microsoft already makes enough money overcharging for what time after time is a mediocre product. Heres a concept: What if instead of forcing users to upgrade their machines and install new versions of their software every year, they made a single unified kernel that was easily updated and a consistent interface that users could keep and customize, and even have some choice in the look, design and behavior, that they could carry over to a new machine when they were ready without any loss or requiring fancy updates and reinstalls, etc. Oh yeah, that would be Linux. But then I guess they couldn't afford to copy and steal all the ideas that everyone else comes up with first and then bastardize them... It takes a lot of victimization to be able to afford to put hundreds of millions of dollars behind something like the surface :(
ahem... If windows makes it a real computer, I'd love to know what the "entirely new category" is...
Xbox and 360 both already have a device similar to this installed in them.
Saying that "Windows is fine" is almost irresponsible. A straight plain windows install with no other software and no internet connection is not fine. Windows still crashes easily... I could go on and on about it, but before someone replies with a counter argument, let me just say that if my computer reboots and I don't expect it to, that either means my UPS ran out of juice during a blackout, or else I just cooked some component on my motherboard, and its safe to say that neither of those happen too often, so basically, I reboot about once a year, for the purposes of a kernel upgrade or a hardware upgrade. Any more than that irritates me. Make that argument for a windows machine, I dare you... Sony, IE or any other single entity is not to blame. It is a failure to write stable software, point blank and period.
You know, as it can take anywhere from 6 months to 10 years for a patent application to get filed and all, you have to wonder exactly how efficient the USPTO really is... I know the government isn't famous for picking up their feet, but with todays computer technology, you'd think that of anyone, the USPTO would have it down to (ahem), a science.
Exactly what I'm getting at. M*crosoft makes money by shoving in your face, and forcing you to deal with it. Google makes money by actually providing something useful... Its an interesting puzzle to wonder, would m*crosoft make more money because they can shove a popup in front of 9/10ths of the planet, or google, because people actually click their link ads because they want them? I wonder what would happen if google teamed up with sites like ebay, and the OSDN... I bet b*llgates (yes, thats one word) and steve ballmer would dirty their pants.
You know, I hate internet ads as much as the next guy. I realize that without them, site like slashdot couldn't survive, but honestly, I don't click on banner ads unless I'm REALLY looking for the particular product/service in that ad, which doesn't happen too often...
Recently, I finally set up my http://www.google.com/ homepage... Interesting service for those of you who haven't set it up yet... Frankly, my browser has pointed to a blank page for years... This is the first time I can think of since netscape navigator went down the toilet that I've actually set a homepage in my browser, and the reason is simple: A google homepage is simple, nonintrusive, and USEFUL...
If either m*crosoft or AOL could come up with a service or utility that I could say the same about, I wouldn't be so objectionable just because of the source, but the point I was originally going to get at remains the same: I click on google ads because they relate to what I need. Every ad I see from m*crosoft or AOL or pretty much most any other site is intrusive, unwanted, and usually unrelated to anything I'm looking for. It doesn't matter how many of their services they combine, they're not going to generate more clicks from me. If as many people feel like I do, I don't think this tactic is anything more than a propaganda technique designed to appease stockholders.
I think the more pertinent point is that its not knowledge that fuels the game, it is imagination. If one requires schooling or education in order to use imagination, the game is wasted. If all you can see are the numbers, you fail to respect the ultimate entertainment of the game. I do not play D&D, and other than sitting in on maybe a few games in old memory, I will admit I am probably the least qualified person I know of to reflect on the game, however, I do play many games, and I see the same problem across the board. People no longer play games for the simple purpose of entertainment, or even just the benefit of spending time with friends... Why does everything have to come to some kind of competition that requires years of training and focus? Can't we just play games and have fun without all the hype?
no offense to D&D players... But uhh... Do you really need 'education' to play D&D? Seriously... Forrest Gump could figure it out.
My first REAL linux distro was Slackware. I believe, as I recall, Slackware 96 that I bought at a bookstore... But thats beside the point... I do not run a massive server cluster, or administrate a huge network. I use Linux on my home computer basically, because I hate microsoft with a burning rage and hatred, and because Unix does what I need it to when I need it to do it. Usually, that means running a web server so I can build and test pages on my computer rather than have to upload them to a site just to find out what I need to fix, or running an IRC client for excessively long periods of time (ehh, forever?). The point is that I use slackware because thats what I really learned unix off of. Granted, I don't think I ever even bothered to install X11 until the turn of the millenium, because I started out with a 486 DX/2 and a 1MB video card that couldn't barely handle windowmaker, much less anything more system intensive, so I spent most of my time in CLI, and when I finally got frusterated with vi, I figured out that pico and jed were very effective tools for modifying the many files I found in /etc, which inevitably is what I believe led to my unix addiction.
So to summarize this whole stupid story, I don't go as far as most gurus to argue with other linux users about which distro is best. I've used plenty of others over the years, whether that was redhat or debian or suse, and I've even used other unix flavors like FreeBSD and OSX (don't laugh. Its worth the knowledge). I think that its really a matter of user preference. If I like slackware because it is such a raw installation, thats MY preference. If someone else likes redhat because of its graphical interface, or because RPM is convenient, that doesn't make one distro more or less useful than the other.
I think it is very rude of someone to accuse a distro of being outdated, or no longer useful simply because it is not to their liking or preference. I may hate microsoft and specifically dislike windows for reasons which would take the next 10 pages to list, but that is not reason for me to go tell every windows user on the planet that their preference is wrong. Frankly, MOST people wouldn't be able to handle the workings of even a minor linux distro like lindows, much less a full blown unix installation, nor should they have to. Windows, as much as I may dislike it and consider it useless, is appropriate for the vast majority of those people. Before anyone else goes off accusing slackware or ANY OTHER distro or software of being useless should consider the point of view of people who use such software before making any judgements, and remember that we're not in competition with each other. We need to support each other if this is going to succeed.