Sounds like Corinthian. They've been in the news lately for being a total scam preying on the weak and taking them for large sums of money. They made some pretty impressive claims too. They all turned out to be completely bogus.

What this outfit claims about itself is just more advertising propaganda. You can't trust it.

Universities are also careful not to use languages that will do too much of the work for the student.

You forgot that part.

"Sorry you can't use language X for this assignment. There would be no point."

> What college has become is a crutch for the public school system for being as shit as it is. And it is shit because it has to pass most people.

That's only because we have this absurd fixation on college prep. This is something also inherent in common core. Not everyone is suited for college. So not everyone should be pushed into the college prep program.

Most people would be better off with the vocational programs that used to be quite common but don't exist anymore.

So both types of "college" have become a crutch for mismanaged public schools.

Even that requires more than a weekend seminar.

A lot of jobs could be handled as apprenticeships but that's not the way that corporations want to treat labor anymore. They want custom tailored laborers for cheap with no effort expended on their part.

Also, this kind of ventures into the territory of "you can be smart or you can be pretty". It helps perpetrate the idea that you have to make yourself a pariah from the majority of women in order to actually be anything you want to be. That's because the missing bit of information here is that women are as sexist as anyone else and will impose their sense of orthodoxy quite readily.

A genuinely liberated "taking care of business" type of woman may find herself shunned by both the homemaker and the "feminist" crowd.

Both will want to control your choices equally.

That's what this "sexism" rating is all about: feminists want to act like church ladies and impose their neo-victorian attitudes on everyone.

Feminists are Tea Baggers without the biblical references.

Yes... the demented world of Apple where daring to buy a 3rd party peripheral is only for "power users" or "cheapskates" or some other class of person that will be denigrated by the hive mind.

THIS here is the biggest reason to avoid Apple products. Not the price. Not the novelty form factors that cook your machine. Not the fact that nothing is maintainable.

It's THIS attitude here that anyone that's using this "platform for creatives" in a remotely creative way will get shouted down by the hive mind.

This is not a feature that adds to that security though. Apple benefits from it's underlying Unixness and not doing the stupid things in Apple apps that get done in MIcrosoft apps.

This extra bit of "security" is entirely unecessary. It's just more of the usual Apple style nonsense where crippling a device is confused with making it better.

It's the kind of propaganda that plays well to idiots that are proud of the fact that they don't know how anything works.

> In my experience, mac laptops cost 20% more and last twice as long as alternative PC laptop manufacturers. That doesn't seem like a bad deal to me.

In my experience PC hardware in general is not nearly as failure prone as Apple fanboys would make you believe. On the other hand, PC hardware in general is not restricted to the "cook your components" form factors that Apple fixates on. So a PC will actually be more durable.

This is why my PC IONs are still chugging along long after the Apple equivalent cooked itself.

Total lack of maintainability can't help Apple hardware either.

Maintaining infastructure is entirely orthogonal to fuel prices. If anyone thought it was a priority, then it would get done regardless of what kind of revenue was being generated from fuel taxes.

We have been ignoring our roads and bridges for a lot longer than fuel has been cheap.

More people win the lottery than have been subjected to that kind of penalty.

Most people aren't even aware that this has happened. So there isn't even the outside chance that it will act as a deterrent for the general population.

No one would want to offer it to you. They want you to pay a pretty penny for anything that constitutes a "decent selection". At best they will want a hefty rental fee out of you and you may be lucky to even get that. Some of the new movies don't offer a rental option at all. You're stuck "buying" it on the streaming services and at a price comparable to the physical media.

Netflix is already close to as good as it can get with a subscription service. I'm not sure they could do much better even with a much more expensive rate.

The studios just don't want to give up the new material for cheap.

> Frankly I still find it hard to believe that so many people watch TV shows and movies on their compute

Have you looked at the back of a computer in the last 5 or 8 years?

They include HDMI ports now.

Once TVs went digital, the distinction between a computer monitor and TV blurred something considerable. Projectors have been very accommodating to computers too (and for much longer).

> XBMC is a player. Plex is a player, sure, but it's also a server. It transcodes your media and hands it off to other Plex clients, and more importantly it serves metadata to Plex clients so that they don't have to fetch and store it locally â" the main weakness of XBMC in an environment with more than one player,

Not a big deal really.

XBMC is the gold standard when it comes to metadata management. So the fact that you have to do it n+1 times is really not a problem.

The lack of a central repository means that you can't do cool multi-room stuff. However, I am not sure that Plex does any of that either. Meanwhile, it's central metadata server is an unbelievable pig and resource hog. It's an amazing disaster to behold.

The main value of Plex is that it will accommodate that $60 streamer that has crap hardware that can't really decode anything.

I would characterize Netflix as those 32 channels on your 500 cable channel bundle that are dominated by old reruns.

Likewise, if you are patient enough you will see older original content from HBO and non-premium cable-only channels.

That leaves "current stuff" and sports.

Yes it is stupid because computing devices are all about network effects. This applies equally well to game consoles and web services. NO ONE is going to want to be restricted to your hardware for something like this. Apple may be able to pull off that kind of nonsense but Sony just doesn't have the chops for it.

Plus the Apple examples includes other devices and an ecosystem that's well established already.

All Sony has is a relatively overpriced game console.

Sony's service should be EVERYWHERE including Android phones and Rokus.