> it's no better to know something before making a decision than not to know
> something, all other things being equal? Have you considered a career in
> politics?
>
No and No, just showing that your argument wasn't sound by using a similar
one.
> You yourself said it wasn't. It either was, or it wasn't:
>
I was implying a timeline, where it the decision was made for one reason and
then later was revised.
> So, if I could find one innovation in Windows, I would be correct to
> generalize that Windows is more innovative? Hey, this Bizarro World is
> kind
> of nice!
>
You could make that generalization, but then someone would call you on it
and ask for more proof by citing other innovations. I am not sure whether
you are actually looking for a laundry list of innovations or just trying to
plug holes in everyway you can.
> You left your sentence unfinished. If someone perceives them to have
> value,
> then they do - for that person. If I don't perceive them to have value,
> they
> have none for me.
>
I figured the rest was obvious.
> Or, I could keep my current car, and continue using the $100 kit which
> already provides all of those things except steering wheel integration.
> And
> when I use my spouse's car, I can pull it out of the lighter socket and
> use
> it in there. I can also take my $10k or so and do something else with it.
>
No one was suggesting that you should change cars to obtain a feature. The
assumption is that when you need/want a new car you will then use features
as a criteria for choosing.
> To me, clearly, the latter solution provides much more value than your
> solution. Your solution may be better for you, but my solution is
> certainly
> better for me. Sound familiar?
>
Based on the way you explained it, the latter solution doesn't seem to
provide any more or less value since you aren't actually changing cars.
> No thanks, I can just turn the wipers on when it starts raining. It's
> amazingly simple!
>
Rain sensing wipers don't turn on and off based on rain; they adjust their
speed based on rain. It is a subtle but important difference. Just like the
fact that the stereo volume automatically adjusts based on the speed of the
car because of the associated increase in noise. Again, you can easily
change the volume of the radio yourself, but AAA studies show that is the
number one cause of accidents.
Look at any one feature in a BMW or a Mac and it isn't so important in the
whole scheme of things, but man those little things sure to add up to a big
deal once you understand the big picture.
> I hardly think I'm unique, actually. It's easy enough to avoid all of
> those
> things you mentioned. We're not talking rocket science here.
>
Tell you what, try and find me a significant percentage of people who have
not had one those things happen to them and I'll buy you a new laptop.
> I don't see how that's any different from what you've been doing, aside
> from
> the fact that my comparison of preemptive multitasking is accurate, while
> your comparison of running processes with different user accounts wasn't.
>
It is quite a bit different since I wasn't picking a specific feature that
one OS had that others didn't at some point in the past. I referred to the
annoyance of changing user accounts in Windows vs. Unix; not specifically
running processes. I wasn't aware of the runas command at the time, so I
didn't realize I could get a command-line for another user that way.
However, having since looked at it, it does seem to do largely the same
things as can be done with su and sudo. Of course, with Mac OS X it just
prompts me for an administrator account whenever I run a program that needs
elevated permissions like certain installer. That is certainly nicer than su
or runas.
> Well, what market other than PCs does Microsoft dominate? Honestly, I
> don't
> think that there's a whole lot of difference between PC Oss right now -
> the
> whole area just isn't that interesting.
>
Well there is Office and Exchange to name a couple.
> On the other hand, I'm an avid Pocket PC user, and I really think that
> Microsoft has been quite a bit more innovative than Palm or Handspring
> when
> it comes to the functionality of the platform. You really ought to check
> it
> out!
>
And amazingly, Microsoft doesn't dominate that market. The actually have
incentive to be innovative.
> I find it to be helpful to work with a platform if I'm going to deploy
> applications on it.
>
No one said you had to stop working with Windows.
-Matt
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
