Given that it's happened at least 10-20 times straight, someone really, really, really can't take dissent. It'll only show that you're much like the people you think the NSA is.
Snowden's actions being of questionable ethics won't be changed by modding me down into Bad.
Not only will you get something of comparable (if not better) quality, they're actually designed to be maintained. For the Thinkpads, you finally get to have IPS again after seeing it depart for about 6 years(last model being the 4:3 T60p). For Dell, you're likely to luck out on larger displays and swappable video cards. In both cases, the machines are designed with a higher degree of maintenance friendliness (favoring the Thinkpads though) and greater part availability.
That, and you usually can make them run OS X if you really wanted to.
Thunderbolt:
It wouldn't be an issue if not for the fact that it's been largely an Apple-only one in implementation. See Firewire and USB for a
Form factor:
As for departing from anything resembling ATX, that underscores their disdain for any maintenance. That, and the thermal issues only make it that much more of an issue to fix versus something that was designed to be maintained.
To those reflexively using the Not Target Market Excuse:
Trying to brush these issues off by using the Apple standard Not Target Market excuse doesn't refute any argument. Yes, I've actually done the forbidden thing of Apple and actually repaired things and encountered it in various models. They view maintenance friendliness as a defect to fix with maintenance hostile design.
They're just Thinking Differently about security.
When we start hearing of damning leaks of Chinese and Russian military/intelligence being exposed, then you might have a point.
It would most certainly vindicate those who saw China walking out with Nortel IP and putting it into a government-run Huawei.
The only valid response to Snowden allegations are to dismiss them and consider them disinformation as long as he is not in US custody. Once he is in a court based on US law (the only one that matters as opposed to the court of public opinion) then all of that can be used as evidence against him.
(Of course,
"People get angry at Glass. They get angry at you for wearing Glass. They talk about you openly. It inspires the most aggressive of passive aggression.
It wont stop until the Rest of Us have a chance at it - and that it is just as open as the Nomenklatura Edition is.
Once Google stops using these kind of shenanigans with their products, the better off they will be.
The new Mac Pro is the most powerful and flexible computer Apple has ever created
Apparently the author hasn't had to service a Mac recently. It might be flexible in some directions, but maintenance friendliness is not one of them.
Now if it was saner like the older Powermacs, then things might be different.
Given the return of the walled-garden versions of the Internet, we might as well call it that.
How did the UK get that bastardized system of work (never mind that your country has zero-hour and "tryout" tiers below that)? There had to be a time when sane working arrangements existed - before contract labor, zero-hour, and "tryout" were made and turned into HR weapons.
I don't know what you mean. When I was working for someone else, I was paying taxes and that. I also never knew when my job was going to get cut out of the picture (I know that this is not the same for many others, but in my case it was).
When working for a conventional employer under regular arrangements, one typically pays some sort of income tax. In comparison, client-based/indirect employment transfers costs(such as taxes and benefits) onto yourself (or an Employer of Record). That is what I meant.
As for not knowing when your job gets cut, flexibility is not your friend in that regard. It's the upstream employer's friend.
I think the opposite is true. Rather than work with the same 10 or so people at a job that we all hate, I work with many clients that all love it when I come in.
However, you still have the issue that you're viewed as being separate versus being part of the employer. They might be close clients, but they are still clients.
On the other hand, being part of the actual (not "of Record") employer removes that distance. You're viewed as being on the same team.
I agree, but I feel that mindset is fading away for the IT world.
Not entirely sure. I've worked for good employers that were quite large and did decently for their own if not good.
There's a point in every company's growth, where one person can no longer do all of the work, but you cannot afford to pay someone else for a full-time position. In this way, it's important to work with other solo IT guys in a symbiotic way.
Also known as the European system of labor(contracts and employers that hate FTE with a passion) with all the negative implications. It's the system that should have by all rights stayed out of the US. Now that it is starting to come to the US, it can be seen as Trouble Ahead.
When you're the world's only hyperpower or a very close friend of theirs, there are no pleasant places to hide.
That's when China discovers they have the space version of the Concordski when the US "accidents" the flight.
Year 3 they just coast with a $100 price bump they are back to the $1000 profit margin per car. So who actually paid the tax? Did the corporation? Sort of for about 3 years. Did the laid off employees pay for it? No but they lost their jobs, but that would have happened anyway with innovation. Did the [redacted] who wanted the car essentially eat the entire tax. Yep. But wait the price for the [redacted] only went up $300 for the car, how did he end up paying the entire $1000? Because the government stole $1000 worth of innovation from the company which eventually would have been passed on to the [redacted] due to [sports term]. Sure the company would have pocketed the bonus profits at first, as they should have for coming up with a better way of doing things, but eventually they would have had to lower their prices to [sports term]. So in the end what should have happened is the price of the car should have dropped to around $4300, but instead it rose to $5300. With inflation that number would be more like $5450 which is a whole another ball of wax of [herp derp].
Then you start playing hardball with the company (and the inevitable lobbyists) about the whole matter. Then remind them that they are not Almighty.
Sure the government can go in and fool with regulations and taxes to put more burdens on the company, but eventually they'll figure out a way around them and again the [redacted] is left holding the bag, with [herp derp] that should have gone to the [redacted] in the form of price reductions. If a company can't then they lose money and eventually go under, or in the case with many "crucial" industries end up getting bailed out making the problem worse.
Essentially you want businesses to be considered the only entity to be permitted an unchecked entitlement mentality to optimal conditions under threat of economic warfare. They hold the governments and regular people hostage for the maximum revenue without regard to the long-term.
They both achieve the same objective with the same intents and views.
That, and if there was a difference, they usually cross over to the illegal anyway.
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken
