19% is better than OSX or Linux. So I guess pathetic relative to a paid OS.
. Now, they plan to get rid of productive employees.
They said they were unloading a lot of Sales employees. Sales is not the definition of "productive". I would prefer they fire 3,000 sales people and invest in 3,000 developers who can make the products better. They should also simplify their sales process so that it's not such a nightmare to license and track your purchases. It's super easy to use the Windows Store to see what apps you own. Have you ever tried to figure out how many licenses you have of any Microsoft Software? It's next to impossible. We track it in a spreadsheet that's constantly out of date where our licenses have gone.
- Make the products better.
- Invest in a nice easy web portal like they have for Office 365 for adding more licenses and assigning them.
- Reduce the licensing complexity by reducing the package count. Slack's pricing is easy and straight forward: Free, Standard and Plus. Now try to calculating how many CAL licenses... whether or not you're allowed to run Windows 10 Pro in a VM or whether or not you're allowed to run a redundant domain controller. You have to be a professional Microsoft sales person to understand what you need to buy.
I consider destruction of the two party system more important than voting for someone I dislike a little less.
That's like saying "I think it's unsportsmanlike to hold a football. I think American Football should only be played with one's feet!" You'll just lose. Over and over again when your opponents use their hands. Handicapping yourself does nothing but work against your interests. It doesn't change the game. It doesn't change the rules... it just makes a fool out of you.
If you want to "destroy the two party system" the only way to do it is to change the rules that everybody plays by to make it advantageous to be a third party.
The only way C wins is if C can either pull enough votes from A and B, or draws all of B's votes. It could and has happened, but it's extraordinarily rare. Usually A or B will adopt the the strongest primary platform of C to keep those votes for themselves.
Conversely to your last point, by the time C ever challenges A and B it will need to have compromised on so many to attract A and B's existing voters that it will have become nearly identical to either A or B.
If the Green party wants to build a progressive platform that attracts 51% of the population... they'll look just like the Democratic party. If the libertarian party wants to attract 51% of the population... they'll end up just like the GOP... well... maybe not the GOP as it is today, which is kind of a mess ideologically at the moment but it'll look like some variation of what the GOP will end up stabilizing into.
The two main parties are in a natural equilibrium of sorts. All that would happen with a massive disruption such as a third party emerging out of nowhere is for the equilibrium to be momentarily disrupted before returning to a very similar state. People's core beliefs don't change quickly.
Which part of "The Israeli tech company will continue to support and maintain current Tesla products" is complicated?
I said the figures are public. Netflix does not lose money on streaming overall, only overseas. Netflix does not make more money from DVD rentals than it does from streaming. Even the article you linked does not say streaming is not profitable for Netflix, which was your own assertion.
Maybe these are recent developments; I leave that research to you.
"Hey Putin, I just launched all of our nukes, enjoy being a parking lot, thought I would give you the heads up that it was me who ordered it!"
*One Nuclear disaster later*
"I didn't think he would take it seriously! It was obviously a joke!"
The surprising part, though, is not just that many people think disks by mail is old fashioned, but that people think that despite the fact that Netflix makes their profit from DVDs in the mail, not from streaming.
That's not true. Netflix loses money on streaming internationally, but in its most recent quarter its profits from domestic streaming were double its profits from DVD rentals. It also had five times as many domestic streaming subscribers than DVD plan subscribers. These figures are public.
Netflix needs to secure a couple of sitcoms to survive:
* Big Bang Theory
Interestingly enough, Netflix is now offering 10 seasons of Friends for streaming.
... and elect a ho-hum stay-the-course centrist....
You misspelled "unprincipled sociopathic war criminal" there. Unfortunately it's not a choice of stepping into a dog turd to avoid a bullet, it's falling on a sword to avoid a bullet.
The only thing to do in that situation is use all available means to push the system into giving you more choices next iteration. Vote Green or Libertarian and demand electoral reform.
Netscape became Firefox which did just fine. And Netscape has its share of proprietary extensions that were just as non-standard as Microsofts because the web sucked without them back in 1999. Most of microsoft's DHTML became HTML5... which was only ratified like last year. Nobody is willing to sit around for a decade for a standards body to work.
POSIX is alive and well in Linux. Windows wasn't a Unix based operating system so it's not shocking it wouldn't stick to Unix compatibility.
Xenix was from the 80s and Microsoft clearly wasn't interested to focus on Windows. It's not like Microsoft slowly extended Unix until it became Windows and Linux/Unix is dead today.
You mostly just listed a bunch of competing products as if that is anything like what is happening today.
Meanwhile, conservative America still has its head up its ass insisting that climate change is a liberal conspiracy and evolution the thing of the devil.
Not here to refute climate change, just to point out that this particular data point doesn't necessarily support it. The fact that the record in the western hemisphere was set in 1913 and has yet to be exceeded suggests that record temperatures are just, you know, kinda rare.
Real life called, it said good luck with that.
This part interested me:
It’s true, the 2008 crisis forced plenty of people to look for additional sources of income, not least of all the recent graduates who, with little experience and limited networks, were confronting the job market for the first time.
Really? I thought the 2008 crisis was when the housing bubble burst. Are people who are "confronting the job market for the first time" really looking to get home loans? Or was it just that their first jobs didn't pay all that great?
Statements like this one just reinforce in a lot of older people's heads the idea that Millennials, as a group, are the "everyone deserves everything" generation. What did these people expect when they had "little experience and limited networks"? Did they honestly think anything had changed about first jobs since the dawn of time? My first job was at a goddamn 7-Eleven, FFS. No reason to go looking for some bullshit armchair economist's theory of why that was.
These screamingly hilarious gogs ensure owners of X Ray Gogs to be the life of any party. -- X-Ray Gogs Instructions