[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1669" id="3428852"] Typical liberal fascist. Don't have "correct" opinions? Then they'll try to hurt you economically. We've seen that quite a bit lately. Thats liberal tolerance in action.[/quote] Have you forgotten the first rule of laissez-faire? Let the market decide???? I'm doing exactly what your kind says I am supposed to do -- vote with my wallet. But now you got your panty in a wad because it is your mo
caseagainstfaith
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1632" id="3428159"]I don't have a problem with scientists. I have a problem with left wing ideologues misrepresenting science to justify policies that grant them more power and enrich their cronies.[/quote] Great. Another conspiracy theorist about the evil left wing cabal. Great. I'll be avoiding purchasing of Stardock products Froggy.
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWJeqgG3Tl8[/video]
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1313" id="3422051"] You're being too concrete. More a passive conspiracy of convenience, fueled by avarice and incompetence at the governmental level. Lord knows both exist in abundance in the world. More than enough to get from A to B. [/quote] If there was that much incompetence in the sciences, computers would never have been invented. Nobody denies governments can be incompetent, individual scientists can be incompet
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1308" id="3422016"] You know, case, I know some really good remedial reading teachers. You could use the help.[/quote] Well, what you said is: [quote who="Daiwa" reply="1308" id="3422016"]What data has been 'faked' has not been 'faked' by governments, just 'scientists'. [/quote] Since you seem to be objecting to my pinning the conspiracy label on you, what exactly are you saying? If you don't speak
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1304" id="3422003"] Spare me, if you wouldn't mind. You do yourself no favors with this sort of nonsense. [/quote] Uh, you were the one who said scientists (in scary quotes) faked the data. When you make absurd claims without supporting evidence, what kind of response do you expect? If you expect anything more than ridicule, you come to the wrong place. Ridiculous claims (Creationism, unsupported conspiracy theories, etc.) des
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1297" id="3421961"] What data has been 'faked' has not been 'faked' by governments, just 'scientists'. [/quote] I should have finished reading messages before posting the above post. You are of the great scientist conspiracy group. You uh, do realize that oil companies have deep pockets and could sponsor all kinds of studies to disprove AGW if in fact it could be disproved. You, do realize this don't you?</p
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="1295" id="3421954"] And AGW Evangelists like to prove their point by just making shit up. Such as the quoted statement.[/quote] Well, it would be wrong to generalize that all denialists claim government conspiracy. Some do make this claim. And, for the record, I have no doubt that governments are quite willing to lie to further their agenda. Still, the idea that most major governments would be "in on" this thing, and manage
Well, I am right, in so far as what I said is measurable facts. But, you are right that an actual solution is difficult. Sure, I have added insulation in my home. But, I still like to live in comfort. I live in Houston and use A/C. When I bought my A/C unit 13 years ago, the efficiency rating of 13 was good, but, not that high by today's standards. So, yes, I am part of the problem and I don't have a real solution. I for one am NOT oppos
I have avoided this thread, because, well, it is so frustrating to deal with denialists. But, FYI, there is a difference between "weather" and "climate". Weather deals with immediate weather conditions. "Climate" deals with weather pattern over time. The fact that immediate weather is not as predictable as we like does not mean that statistical modeling over time is useless. And, sure, it is certainly conceivably possible that new information could come along to call
I don't often check these forums. But, I was lucky, and checked this forum yesterday and saw this. Thanks. I'm surprised I didn't see it on RottenTomatoes. In any case, thanks very much for telling me about it. And, just in time, as I saw the post yesterday. I live in Houston, it was playing about about 6 theaters, with many sell-outs! I was surprised. The theater I was at added a second screen and both sold out. I started watchi
I like watching TV series from start to finish. My wife is rather simple in her tastes, so, we recently watched Cheers from start to finish. Took a few episodes to get going, but, not bad for a sitcom. We may move to Frazier next. We did that with How I met Your Mother, but that is still going. We watched all the episodes until the current season straight through, and then are watching this season week by week. We also watched Twilight Zone, how's that for
As I noted, given how the numbers are generated, without any reference to by how much one was faster than another, you can't really tell much from the numbers. If Windows 7 was twice as fast as XP, or .0001% faster than XP, the ranking would be exactly the same. Makes the numbers not that useful. Its a good sign, yes, but, way too vague to be terribly useful.
Well, the author of the article says he couldn't give raw numbers due to M$'s EULA, so, he could only rank them. So, if one OS was only negligibly faster than the others, it would get the same rank if it was significantly faster. Which makes it hard to make anything meaningful from the numbers. Also of note, they had in the tests some 32 and some 64 bit builds of Windows 7, but only 32 bit builds of XP and Vista. So it wasn't a completely fair test. Still, it was interesting that on every t
As far as the new file system, WinFS, last I heard, it was not "mothballed", just delayed yet again. That was supposed to be a part of "Cairo" which was originally supposed to be NT 5. Then they said that various parts of "Cairo" would be rolled out in later Windows releases--with WinFS being one ballyhooed piece that keeps getting postponed. But, at least last I heard, it was expected to be released in a service pack to Vista, and maybe even in a W
In regards to Gartner's prediction that Vista would be the last "major version of Windows", what they predict is that MS will move towards a modular OS model instead of a monolithic OS model, and that therefore what would come next wouldn't be "Windows" per se. But I found the prediction not very likely myself. Windows is one of MS's major cash-cows. I can't see them making a fundamental change like that until the market demands it.
I guess I don't quite understand how it is that the download page link is public, and yet MS says: "Windows Vista Release Candidate 1 (RC1) is now available for Customer Preview Program (CPP) participants only. If you are not registered but would like to receive RC1, the CPP will open to new participants in the coming weeks." So, what's the deal here? I'm downloading now.
I've got a different problem. When WB 5 starts up, the Windows ODBC Data Source Administrator asking me to pick a DSN. It appears that WindowBlinds is trying to open a database of skins, and can't. In the middle of writting this, I discovered something else strange. The ODBC Administrator says I have absolutely no drivers installed. Normally, I would expect to see a number of ODBC drivers installed, such as for MS SQL Server, Access, etc
Considering there is already a x64 version of XP, of course there will be an x64 version of Vista. But, I understand that x32 and x64 will remain separate versions. There are still plenty of x32 only processors still being sold even today, so they can't drop x32 support anytime soon. But, since the x32 and x64 versions are being developed in parallel, they should have the exact same feature set and essentially identical stability. But, the x64 vers
Please explain on how Microsoft is "price gouging". Perhaps you might consider reading someone's post before criticising it. I said there is NO CASE to be made for price gouging. In fact, you even quoted me saying that I said that. <img src="http://images.stardock.com/wc/smiles/SadAngry.gif" bord
I can be pretty leftist, anti-corporate. But, the X-Box has so far been a money looser for MS. So, at least so far, MS can hardly be accused of using the XBox to line their pockets. To be sure, they no doubt hope to eventually recoup the investment or they wouldn't be doing it. But there simply is no case to be made for price gouging on the XBox. And, by they way, I'd say the same for Stardock. I doubt Frogboy has bought himself a Lear
Mr. Gates, please make multitasking finer-grained and more responsive. There is NO JUSTIFICATION for my having a 3 GHZ computer, and I can't open notepad quickly if the machine is busy with other work. You know, like BeOS? (I borrowed a few words from other more brief requests.)
From the reviews I've read, the best out there are MS's, CounterSpy, and SpySweeper. But, at least for now, MS's is free. The only minor annoyance that I have with MS's is it tends to drop multiple copies of its icon into the tray. I've had like 15 target icons in my tray.
As to the debate as to whether the Intel chips that Apple will be using are "x86" or not, you'll notice that in the press release, the phrase "X86" was NOT used. However all the technical data on the Apple developer site indicates that it will in fact be a Pentium-equivalent CPU.
As to the debate as to whether the Intel chips that Apple will be using are "x86" or not, you'll notice that in the press release, the phrase "X86" was NOT used. However all the technical data on the Apple developer site indicates that it will in fact be a Pentium-equivalent CPU.