Comment Smirnoff says... (Score 1) 91
In America, you claim your electrical grid was hacked. Because from Soviet China, grid hacks you!
In America, you claim your electrical grid was hacked. Because from Soviet China, grid hacks you!
"Used to the old interface".
As in: Windows XP has menubars. Mac OS X has a menubar. Linux distros has menubars. Windows 3.1 had menubars. Mac OS 9 had a menubar. BeOS HAD FRAKKING MENUBARS. In fact, every Gods-damned GUI OS since the Lisa and the Xerox Parc have had menubars!
But then some idiot at Microsoft comes along and shits on 25 years of user interface wisdom by saying: "Hey, you know what? People don't need a menubar. Sure, it only takes up a fraction of screen real-estate, but let's just take it away and not even give them the OPTION of putting it back. Let's replace it with something bulky and clunky where the system of command organization is cryptic and foreign."
So call me a whiner if you like, but when someone takes the steering wheel off the dashboard of your new Taurus because they're "trying something different with the user interface", don't expect any sympathy because its difficult to use.
Yup.
And for Office 2007?
Ohh.... you can't.
Not to mention the fact that you'll never work in IT again.
This is a totally unsurprising situation to find at many small businesses. When a business consists of just a handful of people, it is cost prohibitive to actually BUY software.
There is a point, however, that a business has to bite the bullet and "go legit". At certain sizes, businesses show up on Microsoft's anti-piracy radar, and your business can find itself on the receiving end of a software audit. At that point, the business will be liable for not only the costs of any software installed but also fines.
This is a good way to present the situation to your bosses: It's a matter of cost-benefit analysis.
Are they ditching the ribbon and bringing back the god-damned menu bar? If not, I could care less.
In the West, you make jokes about Canada.
In Soviet space, no one can hear you scream!
I'm very fond of the Server Admin and Workgroup Manager apps that enable clean, easy, GUI-based, remote admin. Also, it's an operating system I'm very familiar with, mostly in terms of directory structure (where everything is) and the way users work.
In theory, I was also hoping that Software Update would streamline the update process, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Strike one.
Hear, hear.
Sometimes it's a pain to get the
If the build-savvy Apple community wanted to help distribute ports, they should just build a whole bunch of
I use OS X server because I am a Mac-booster and because my associates and I are familiar with *nix conventions and the open-source services that generally run on them. I'd much rather deal with this than run a Windows Server platform.
And for the love of the Gods, don't try to sell me on fink and darwinports. Some people seem to think that dports putting everything it installs in a separate directory is a good thing. It's just confusing and messy.
I've tried fink and dports several times and they've never worked correctly for various reasons. If I can download and gcc compile a project's source in a reasonable amount of time, why would I bother wrestling with fink and dports?
There is no distinction between any AI program and some existent game.