linux can work fine then. Linux is usually pretty easy (all OS's have their faults) and the communities surrounding the different distro's are usually full of great people. If this is your first time using linux, I would recommend either Ubuntu or Mint.
What you cannot do on Linux that you can do on Windows is run Windows programs. That is really it. There is a program that will usually do whatever you need to be done written for linux. Gaming is always an issue, but Wine can help there, especially with older games.
There really is no reason to not have a linux box lying around. You will never lose anything by learning something new and different.
At the time they made it, only xp could be put on a netbook (i have seen vista on one and I swear it took twenty minutes to load notepad). But since they don't make almost any money on XP (the cost of a netbook is 200~300$USD, so the os is subsidized), they want to cripple the netbook to sell more Vista laptops and desktops. Now that windows 7 is "made for netbook" the restriction doesn't even make sense for them.
I had a netbook (Acer Aspire One) with Ubuntu(netbook version), Arch Linux(gnome and openbox) and Fedora(gnome), and have to say that it isn't exactly a fun experience. I am not exactly sure why these things are popular. and I couldn't even imagine a netbook with the same specs running xp being anywhere near usable.
(just me, but i seriously think that the atom processor is just too underpowered. I hope more arm netbooks come out so i can play with one of those.)
do you actually comprehend what you post? The movie has ALREADY been posted online. ALREADY. Why on earth should they be worried about a copy of a film being put online when it is ALREADY there?
Never mind. Obviously common sense and actual intellect are foreign concepts to you.
"Even if they did, file sharing isn't really something people often do in public so much as in their home on their own pc. What do they care if its unacceptable if nobody sees them or knows about it?"
a loyal opposition is useful. Anti-mike, while making many stupid remarks has made some fairly good ones. I wouldn't say today is his best day, but there are days that I completely disagree with the Real Mike, too. Today he seems to be pushing for infinite copyrights (even though he says he doesn't) which, to anyone with a small amount of common sense, is stupid.
Copyright shouldn't last a century. copyright probably shouldn't last the life of a normal human being.
But all in all, anti-mike has the right to make a point that is opposite of what we all believe and agree with. The great thing about this day and age, is that everyone has a right to have an opinion. Even though that opinion may be annoying.
"Sales of luxuries are not like sales of necessities or water, in that damming them up won't necessarily make them flow elsewhere."
I have to say that is the best point ever made on this site.
Entertainment isn't necessary to survival, and therefore there won't be more "windows" if you block all the easy/cheap ones. People will decide that food and shelter is more important than "Generic Action Flick XVIII : The Actioniest." The main reason that movies made so much this year was that, in comparison to other entertainment options, movies (at a theater) are cheap. But if we get hit by another recession inside this one, I would say that frivolous entertainment (ie: Hollywood) will be hit harder than they ever have been.
"Actually, no. The definition of 'steal' as noted in Merrriam-Webster is:
1 a : to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully.
or how about:
1 c : to take surreptitiously or without permission
Sounds to me like these definitions fit pretty well. "
But i am NOT taking anything! you seem to miss that part. I am copying something. big difference, even in the eyes of the law.
and your car salesman analogy is weak at best. he isn't making money directly from the song, only indirectly, and that is a stretch in logic. and yes, the Beatles lose nothing.
"Good news. There is no penalty for not stealing anything, whether it be stored in physical or digital format."
Actually would say that DRM alone is more than enough punishment, and only music has moved out from under that weight just recently. Execs care only slightly more for customers than they do pirates, the only difference is that instead of suing, they leech them. Same in the end over a life time, just not as flashy as a lawsuit.
Thing is, I do not file share music. I buy from iTunes or Amazon if i want a big album, or i get music from Jamendo, and donate as I feel is necessary. I am not defending people who do file share, I am just saying that it isn't "stealing". Not in the eyes of the law or the dictionary.
On the post: Why Does Microsoft Limit Netbooks?
Re: Re:
On the post: Why Does Microsoft Limit Netbooks?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why Does Microsoft Limit Netbooks?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why Does Microsoft Limit Netbooks?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=windows+help
On the post: Why Does Microsoft Limit Netbooks?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why Does Microsoft Limit Netbooks?
Re: Re:
What you cannot do on Linux that you can do on Windows is run Windows programs. That is really it. There is a program that will usually do whatever you need to be done written for linux. Gaming is always an issue, but Wine can help there, especially with older games.
There really is no reason to not have a linux box lying around. You will never lose anything by learning something new and different.
On the post: Why Does Microsoft Limit Netbooks?
I had a netbook (Acer Aspire One) with Ubuntu(netbook version), Arch Linux(gnome and openbox) and Fedora(gnome), and have to say that it isn't exactly a fun experience. I am not exactly sure why these things are popular. and I couldn't even imagine a netbook with the same specs running xp being anywhere near usable.
(just me, but i seriously think that the atom processor is just too underpowered. I hope more arm netbooks come out so i can play with one of those.)
On the post: CNN's Take On 'Book Piracy'
Re:
On the post: Is Hiding A New DRM Standard Behind The Guise Of 'It Works On Any Device' Really That Compelling?
Re: Re: old media
On the post: Sony Won't Support Its Own Movie For An Oscar Over Misplaced Piracy Fears
Re:
Never mind. Obviously common sense and actual intellect are foreign concepts to you.
On the post: Will France's Three Strikes Law Matter?
Re: Re: Mostly true
like porn!
On the post: Bono: We Should Use China's Censorship As An Example Of How To Stop Piracy
Re: Re:
On the post: Bono: We Should Use China's Censorship As An Example Of How To Stop Piracy
Re: Doesn't he realise that
He isn't all that bright.
On the post: Tomorrow Is National Book Burning Day; Thank Your Friendly Entertainment Industry Lobbyists
Re: Re:
a loyal opposition is useful. Anti-mike, while making many stupid remarks has made some fairly good ones. I wouldn't say today is his best day, but there are days that I completely disagree with the Real Mike, too. Today he seems to be pushing for infinite copyrights (even though he says he doesn't) which, to anyone with a small amount of common sense, is stupid.
Copyright shouldn't last a century. copyright probably shouldn't last the life of a normal human being.
But all in all, anti-mike has the right to make a point that is opposite of what we all believe and agree with. The great thing about this day and age, is that everyone has a right to have an opinion. Even though that opinion may be annoying.
On the post: OPTi Shows: When You Can't Compete In The Market, You Sue For Patent Infringement
Re: Those who can ...
On the post: Movie Studios Pissed Off At Netflix, Don't Want To Allow More Streaming Movies
Re: Re: Avi & Genius!
Two different places from two different religions.
;)
On the post: Movie Studios Pissed Off At Netflix, Don't Want To Allow More Streaming Movies
Re:
I have to say that is the best point ever made on this site.
Entertainment isn't necessary to survival, and therefore there won't be more "windows" if you block all the easy/cheap ones. People will decide that food and shelter is more important than "Generic Action Flick XVIII : The Actioniest." The main reason that movies made so much this year was that, in comparison to other entertainment options, movies (at a theater) are cheap. But if we get hit by another recession inside this one, I would say that frivolous entertainment (ie: Hollywood) will be hit harder than they ever have been.
On the post: Movie Studios Pissed Off At Netflix, Don't Want To Allow More Streaming Movies
Re:
whatever man. no one really care about whatever stupid shit your spouting again.
On the post: Yet Another Attempt At Ad Supported Music
Re: Re: Only offer 20+ year old content.
2)make some more stuff up
3)???
4)profit (after a few quarters)
at least that is how i read it.
On the post: Yet Another Attempt At Ad Supported Music
Re: Re: Re: Many Shades of Grey
1 a : to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully.
or how about:
1 c : to take surreptitiously or without permission
Sounds to me like these definitions fit pretty well. "
But i am NOT taking anything! you seem to miss that part. I am copying something. big difference, even in the eyes of the law.
and your car salesman analogy is weak at best. he isn't making money directly from the song, only indirectly, and that is a stretch in logic. and yes, the Beatles lose nothing.
"Good news. There is no penalty for not stealing anything, whether it be stored in physical or digital format."
Actually would say that DRM alone is more than enough punishment, and only music has moved out from under that weight just recently. Execs care only slightly more for customers than they do pirates, the only difference is that instead of suing, they leech them. Same in the end over a life time, just not as flashy as a lawsuit.
Thing is, I do not file share music. I buy from iTunes or Amazon if i want a big album, or i get music from Jamendo, and donate as I feel is necessary. I am not defending people who do file share, I am just saying that it isn't "stealing". Not in the eyes of the law or the dictionary.
Next >>