dbeachy, Helior, (and I) are just getting proved right post after post. This IS a religion for you guys. You can't see it, and don't want to see it. Each post you make just further demonstrates this. It's kinda funny in a certain way. But this is the exact same mob mentality that takes place in any form of extreme predjudice (including religious, racial, etc). You all feel you are morally correct (and this bit about using Windows hurting the world, OMFG, if there was ANY single thing to point to as proof of this religious attitude about Linux, THAT is it!), and ANYone that points out the ignorance and BS of your stance is shouted down as reprenting some sort of inherent evil. And if you doubt that, look at this thread. You feel that anyone who points out how incorrect you (all) are about your rabid hatred of M$ is somehow instigating and also inherently praising M$ as god's gift to the world. You get insulted and upset that someone has the AUDACITY to DARE point out something positive about M$.
And that means this thread WILL continue in this pattern until you get bored, distracted, or it gets locked. And it WILL happen again, because you can't actually live and let live.
Tommy - you should learn when to quit dude. Seriously. This is a riot. lol
No one here is claiming you can do that on a 286. It can be done on a processor running at less than XP's minimum requirements, much less Vista's. Less than 10% of all destop users (personal or businesss) have any real need for more than a 1Ghz processor, and an OS any more advanced than Win2K. They don't need or use features added since Office 2000, and were forced to upgrade (and re-train employees on the new versions) simply to support MS's bottom line. While this may have been good for MS's economy, it was detrimental to the economy of the vast majority of business, and the economy in general. Money spent on un-needed uprades was money not spent researching new products or implementing new services. It meant an expense with no actual ROI, spending money for no net gain.
In the 50s, nobody needed to send email. In the 80s, nobody needed to video conference. This is an incredibly stupid argument (not as stupid as claiming that everyone is "harmed" by people using Windows, but close). You cling to this only because you can't come up with something real. I can't BUY a system, at ANY cost, that would have trouble running XP today (second hand not being counted). 1) it's too cheap, stop whining. 2) the only reason it IS that cheap, and that you HAVE that 1GHz machine is BECAUSE of a NEED to keep pushing the power and speed boundries (as well as the penetration into the market made possible by Microsoft). Learn history, face reality, and get over it.
This is a failure in management, and has nothing to do with which OS or software you use. It actually makes my point - it's as difficult and expensive to train people to use what you have as it is to train them on a new (but very similar in function) software. It's as easy (or difficult, depending on how you want to see it) to train someone to use Open Office instead of Office 98 as it is to train them to use Office 2007 instead of Office 98. The "they already know how to use what we have" argument fails, since Windows or Office upgrades require retraining as much as migrating to Linux or Open Office.
Nobody gets retrained to use Windows. This is an utterly ignorant statement. Not a single person had to be re-trained on any given version of Office either. That's a fact. But as always, that differs from your fantasy.
Likewise, as has been pointed out before, sometimes a few inefficiencies are cheaper than ultimate efficiency - in other words, it is most certainly NOT a "failure in management". It's actually proper management. You don't understand the specifics of this situation. Not ever tiny advance is worth the trouble and cost of the transition period. A good manager knows when to leave well enough alone.
No-one claims that nobody needs newer equipment.
Yes, you all do. But it's not surprising that you are utterly incapable of seeing that.
No, you were not like me. I've never advocated getting the cheapest anything. I have always advocated buying quality products, even when more expensive initially. Spending an extra $50 on a quality power supply instead of a cheap "no-name" can save you hundreds down the road. As you pointed out before, CDW is a very valuable resource.
Good lord dude. lol I sincerely hope you are not like this in other, non-religious aspects of life. Could you have tried to twist that statement ANY further? :lol: Going to pricewatch and getting the best price on quality equipment is EXACTLY like getting the cheapest POS available, yeah.
3 million dollars is not a small business. Small businesses have values well under One million, usually less than $2k. That is a medium business, even if you only employ a half dozen people.
It is small. You just have a smaller perspective. Your limitations are not my problem.
Modern routers don't require a seperate PC to run them. But thanks for making my point - you have a solution that works and don't see a good reason to upgrade it to a modern more powerfull solution - even though a new Cisco router would be more powerfull, and cost much less than what it's replacing did.
Here's where it REALLY get's good.
Cisco.... 5 Axis Router..... :rofl:
I specified the name and nature for a reason, to prevent any confusion.
That's fine if you want to play a single song, but winapm's playlists rely on paths so moving that collection to a different drive will render any playlist you have useless. Also, please note that I said "your media player" not "Media Player". I also use Winamp, but not the latest version which is packed with features I would never use and hogs resources I'd rather use for something else.
Please note, I never said you said "media player" - you later state that you think I pleasure myself to a Windows manual, so it would go without saying that use if Windows Media Player to be implied, thus my desire to point out that it is NOT used, and you don't know who you are talking to.
In the real world, we just don't have to go moving stuff around. Play-lists are too easy to create anyway in that rare, 1 in a million chance that we actually have to change a drive letter for some screwed up reason. However, given that you can also re-assign drive letters, that's even less of an issue. AND.... given that you are talking about you and me, and you fancy yourself an über-geek, then writing a script to modify those playlists should be no trouble at all, and therefore making that an even MORE irrelevant point.
Yes, great for a 5 node network, which is the majority of networks in this country. Yet earlier, you said that they should go to the expense of getting a server.
They would STILL be better served by a server. That's just the way it is. Too many benefits, too little cost, no matter HOW small the buisness is. You're grasping at straws because you don't have much else you can really do. (either that or you just really don't understand, but I try to give the benefit of the doubt.
)
Actually, MS DID force people to intall their product, even if a competitors product was installed also. That's one of the reasons they were convicted. Forcing someone to pay for your product when they don't want it is wrong. It's essentially a "tax" and only the Government has the right to tax people.
It's not a tax, it's leveraging a product. You don't understand either.
You can try to ignore a law you don't like, but it's not going to be easy when you're in jail for breaking it. And the 18th Amendment couldn't even get passed in the first place today. Several states have passed laws prohibiting same-sex marraiage,, and those laws usually get repealed by the state supreme courts because they are unconstitutional. The mechanism for rpeealing unjust laws is even stronger today than it was in the 30's, you just need to use the process and do it legally.
I don't have the time nor inclination to educate you about history. But I will point out that you once again took things out of context because you either don't understand, or, more likely, HAVE to because you don't have any other real options (and you certainly can't just let this go, I'm a heretic afterall
lol). Re-read the comment and note the "IF" placed in there about it being passed today. Little words can really make a big difference.
Also, one brief aside, when you make an amendment, you are changing the Constitution, and so it doesn't MATTER if it is UnConstitutional or not, that is in fact what you are trying to do. ANYthing can be passed as an amendment, IF it passes both houses AND gets ratified by 3/4s of the states. Anything can be repealed, over-ruled, added, or changed. That's the difference between an amendment and a law, and why the amendment process was provided, and also why it was made so difficult.
But like I said, it's too much effort to try to hand-hold you through all of that.
No-one in this thread said Windows sucks for everything.
Yes, you and others have. Even if not in exact words.
We just get tired of people like you who claim it's better than it is, and don't like the alternatives. You clearly seem to think that Windows is a better solution for everyone, when it's often not.
....because I point out the lies, BS, and ignorance in your comments, and dislike your religious fervor, I naturally think it is the best solution for everyone and everything. Of course! How silly of me not to see that! :lol: This is too funny to be made up. Read the thread again, someone took yet another shot at Windows starting things off, and you and the others took offence that there was a non-beliver amongst your ranks, and you've launched it into a 5 pager. Hate to break it to ya, but that's the facts.
But that 300hp WRT wouldn't be avilable for you to own if "ricers" hadn't found ways to get more power from a smaller engine. The technology that is used to make those cars comes from "ricers", or hot rodders, if you prefer. The technology that Subaru uses to make it's WRT engines comes from their racing department. It was developed so that they could win against other cars without breaking the rules by having more displacement than the rules for that class allowed. If Subaru was the only car manufacturer (or just had an overwhelming semi-monopoly) they would have no reason to innovate, ant those high performance vehicals wouldn't ever have been created in the first place.
:rofl: I am DYIN' here!
Ok, first of all, I said 300
rwhp. It's 350bhp at the flywheel.
Secondly, I don't own a Subaru. And tying back to the previous comment, Subaru's are AWD, therefore, it would be
whp, NOT
rwhp (unless I pulled the front driveshafts or something stupid like that).
Thirdly, there is no such thing as a "WRT". What you
mean to say is WRX. A 4-door, all wheel drive, turbocharged rally car for the streets. The hopped up factory version is call the STi.
What I haven't said or implied yet, is that I can't stand 4-doors, and if I EVER bought one, it would either be a Cadillac CTS (probably the -V) or a G8 GXP.
However, what I have intimated is that I have a 4
seat coupe, with a stated 300rwhp. None of that even comes close to a Subaru. ....."wrt".... :lol:
Would Intel be making multicore 45 nm processors available at such a low cost if they didn't have to compete with AMD? I think not.
Because in your world, they'd never have developed the 286, 386, or 486 either.
If MS was truly responsible for pushing the advancement in hardware as you claim, no-one would be offering computers with 4 times the power needed to run Windows. The harware advances you credit MS for are the result of healthy competition between the hardware manufactuters, the same as the fast cars you like are the result of healthy competition between automakers. MS has nothing to do with it. They still compete to build the fastest supercomputer, even though no-one actually buys supercomputers anymore - they use distributed processing such as clusters and clouds. Historical fact of life - Competion breeds advancement - monopolies stifle it.
You refuse to understand. I'd like to beleive that you have the capacity, but you clearly lack the desire. Here's another hint for you - economies of scale. All the competition in the world is irrelevant if nobody is buying and the production rates are a few dozen a year. Costs will remain incredibly high, and the money for R&D and production of more powerful replacements just won't be there.
Thus.... (let me tie it together for you
), without driving the market for computers WELL into the mainstream, bringing as many people onboard as possible, sparking a real demand, Intel and the OEMs could never get the prices down, or power up. THAT is how M$ is responsible for the state of things. They were the genesis. They allowed IBM to bring it's weight to bear and drive a product into buisnesses which employees then wanted at home, and as a side benefit, M$ also became a defacto standard, allowing the software industry to grow (and hardware, too as drivers are a real concern, as you keep harping on cost and cost-effectiveness, you'll be forced to agree that it's not cost effective to spend money trying to reach 5% of the market).
