Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Were the users randomized? (Score 1) 519

Hateboi? What are you, 12? And you're definitely acting like a massive Mac Fanboy here. Replying to a 3 day dead article to say "but but Note 7!" when we're talking about PCs and laptops. But hey if you want to bring phones into it, I'll totally acknowledge Apple was the visionary leader in phones catching fire:

and their latest batch doesn't seem to be immune:

Should we now shift the goalposts to some other area? Perhaps cars? Ford totally pioneered the exploding car tech with their Pinto...

Comment Re:Were the users randomized? (Score 1) 519

Problems with their Macbook Pros only acknowledged after a class action lawsuit:

Another video card recall, this time in the 27" iMac:

Hard drives too:

I do like how they say it's a "small number" of units and yet set up an entire program to handle that one component's replacement.

Those are the ones that immediately came to mind but there are also others I recall with their Kleenex box Mac Pro and more. It's interesting how it's usually the more expensive hardware that has the big problems with them. Nothing like sticking it to your biggest customers?

Comment Re:Were the users randomized? (Score 5, Informative) 519

The problem is that not everyone is you. At a former job I supported PCs and then the director of marketing decided that he liked Macs so he unilaterally switched his group to Macs. Anecdotally I'd say the users had just as many problems that needed my help as they did when they were on PCs, and in addition had additional problems they needed sorting out in the first couple of weeks following the switchover due to their lack of familiarity with OSX. Most of their day to day problems were software related, so the underlying OS didn't factor into that one way or the other, and these peoples' self troubleshooting skills were practically nonexistent so it meant just as much work for me, and in some cases more as I was also then tasked to find them alternate software to do a given task.

For the average users, once you get past the enthusiasts skewing the numbers the IT savings will probably not be as significant as this article makes them out to be. People are still going to be having trouble mapping a drive, sharing a folder, logging into an SFTP site on Windows or OSX.

Hardware wise, the Macs generally use decent hardware that lasts, but also charge a premium for that. If offices used PCs that weren't the cheapest thing that fell off the turnip truck they'd see as good or better failure rates than the Macs. And Apple hasn't been 100% immune to shitty hardware slipping out the door so spending more on the Mac isn't a bulletproof guarantee either.

Comment Re:Hilarious (Score 1) 186

Forget connectivity. Belichick is going back to paper. How much "connectivity" does that have?

Reading through his rant he barely mentions any specific problem with the tablets other than alluding to a problem shooting video. I'd suspect this is yet another problem with overselling and under delivering on what the technology - in this case tablets - were supposed to do. If the tablets were used to display the same info as the paper he's going back to, plus having additional things like perhaps archives of all previous games' notes archived and indexed - which wouldn't need connectivity - and a handful of modest improvements initially I'm sure the coaching staff would have been pretty happy with them. Instead I'm willing to bet they were sold a half baked load of goods and outlandish capabilities with a bunch of barely usable "apps" that ran like shit and did everything "in the cloud" even when it was completely unneeded.

Comment Re: Nearly useless (Score 1) 65

While the idea is tempting, the problem is the impossibility of even enforcement and the whole judge/jury/implementer problem.

As an example, say your best friend gets a little drunk and a cop comes up to him to try to get him to go home. He's not having any of it and spits at the cop. So the cop takes out his baton and clocks your friend across the head to "tune him up a little" and then takes him in. Your friend sits in the drunk tank with a pounding headache and is released in the morning with a bump on the head for being a doofus, lesson learned. Fair play right?

Now imagine that blow had the same force but was at just the wrong angle. Your friend suffers a small brain bleed from the impact but since he's drunk nobody listens to his complaint or notices the odd coordination problems. He sits in the drunk tank until the morning when he's found to be unresponsive. He's rushed to the hospital and after surgery has permanent brain damage. Did your friend deserve to be crippled for life by spitting on a cop? No?

That's why we don't hand out physical violence as summary punishments.

Comment Re:I hope Apple Pay will die (Score 3, Informative) 284

Same with "rewards" programs, Airmiles, etc. That stuff isn't free either. Merchants get hit for it, and end up passing that on to everyone in the form of inflated prices. Seriously, how could they not? If a merchant's margin on something is 10% and paying for it with a cashback card takes 1% on top of the 1-3% already charged for using the credit card, of course the merchant's going to do something about that vanishing margin.

Comment Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score 1) 552

Oh we don't even need to go that far. To use Chappelle as an example, he references the Michael Richards rant that basically screwed Richards' career in one of his stand up shows, and mentions semi-jokingly that's one of the reasons he's terrified of cameraphones.

And going back to that rant of Richards', if there wasn't a video of it, chances are nobody outside of that club would have even heard about it.

Comment Re:Why not covered by insurance? (Score 4, Informative) 195

> You have inferior care that gets people killed.

Holy shit, it's a real in the flesh idiot who has bought the US healthcare astroturf hook line and sinker. You don't live here, you don't use our system and yet you feel comfortable slinging bullshit like that around?

> You have arbitrary limits on expensive care that are a death sentence.

We don't no. But do look into US healthcare providers' lifetime limits and until the ACA those "preexisting conditions".

> You don't develop the interesting new treatments.

Horse. Shit. Insulin, Rhogam, the Salk polio vaccine trial, T - cells, AIDS medications, the ebola vaccine, etc.

You should really educate yourself. You're kind of an embarrassment.

Comment Re:Why not covered by insurance? (Score 5, Insightful) 195

> I won't outright object to a single-payer tax supported medical system, but it's pretty obvious that we'd need to put some rules into place as it's not financially viable to provide the unlimited care that people are capable of consuming.

And yet countries like Canada where I live have a lower healthcare spend per capita, we have a longer life expectancy, and nobody here goes bankrupt from medical conditions. The problem in the US isn't that the people will "consume too much healthcare", the problem is you have a system built where several levels of companies have their hands out to gouge as much as they can. In the US the hospitals and the insurance companies negotiate prices for everything and with several companies in the mix everyone wants (and gets) their piece. In Canada, we have a single payer system where the government runs a board of doctors who determine what a procedure should cost and that is what a doctor or hospital will be paid for that procedure or visit. Period.

>The most obvious are that taxpayers shouldn't be forced to subsidize the consequences if your unhealthy lifestyle.

Hello slippery slope. What's an unhealthy lifestyle? Obesity sure, same with smoking and drinking. But what about other things? Play football, hockey, basketball? Go skydiving, rock climbing, biking or kayaking? Skiing? Construction? All of those activities and more can lead to very expensive injuries. If premiums go up for unhealthy lifestyles, why not risky ones too? Hell for that matter what about using a car, driver or passenger? Statistically the average person will be in 2.7 significant car accidents in their lifetime. So really if you use vehicles it's not a matter of if, but when you will become a burden to your healthcare provider. Better bump those peoples' premiums too....

Comment Re:A bad Ford product? (Score 1) 292

As I mentioned to operagost, the early Hyundais were a travesty. I worked with a guy who had a mid 80s Pony and the thing was a joke. But rather than taking the domestic car makers approach and believing their shit didn't stink, Hyundai recognized they had a problem and went through a massive improvement program and by the mid 90s when I got my first Accent, they'd practically turned night into day for reliability. My 2003 Accent that I had for 11 years, not a single problem. The only expenses were gas, oil changes and scheduled maintenance on it the whole time I owned it.

Slashdot Top Deals

Save the whales. Collect the whole set.