|
|
|
Post Your Bad Media Experiences Here
|
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
27. December 2005 @ 10:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey don't get me wrong. Today's floppy is next to useless, and I too haven't used one for quite some years now. 1.44MB is pretty much of a joke. There is no question about giving up floppies. They are quite dead already. My mentioning to "floppy" is that we need a medium we could somewhat use LIKE a floppy.
Personally i'm pretty fond of usb-sticks. But they're still pretty expensive to own a bunch of few GB ones. Next to that, come external hardrives. But they are not so portable indeed. They're quite big, most often in need for powersupply, susceptible to "moving accidents", not very friendly with active electromagnetic equipment.
Ofcourse optical technology was very much needed. WHEN it came out. That's why most people were quite eager to buy CD-ROMs [remember the "Multimedia PC" stndards?], CD-Rs, DVD-ROMs etc. And sure is the dominant solution today. I'm just saying that I hope that is coming to an end, because from where I'm standing, it is starting to fall quite short.
Most propably they sure will stay with us. They are a very cheap medium for vendors to give out. Whether it be s/w or movies or whatever.
But as for the end-user's backing up needs, they are quite cumbersome.
I wasn't saying any different from you brobear : " Point being, useful technology gets dated and becomes less useful."
Optical technology was a great advance in so many ways.
But IMHO new advances in that area are starting to become less useful by the step. CD-R as compared to to a floppy was quite a great deal. As they say great quantitive differnces become qualitive ones. DVD's in comparison with CD's was an appreciable change, if not for games and movies. Still, I think it was a much lesser change as it was with the floppy-CD one. The DVD->blu/HD, i think is an even lesser one. The benefits we gain, in no way address their problems, and that is why people are getting less and less eager to aquire them.
Back in the day, there would be no single person to say "hey, I'm doing just fine with floppies, why bother". Today we are not eager to pay for the advancement, so we take the usual route of "i'll buy it, when it is cheaper than what i already have". I too have now a DL DVD writer, only because when i bought it, it would be quite silly (and difficult as a matter of fact) to get a nonDL one. The price difference would be somethning rather insignificant.
AFAIK a good way of judging how useful some technology is, is by it's priority for you to spend your money on. If it was so useful for us (i mean the blu/HD advancement), we wouldn't be having this conversation.
There are plcaes to put your money on and make a bigger difference for yourself, than to put it on a bluHD thing.
But we do need something more. And I think that if it would be available, we'd be more eager to get it. And ofcourse that does not mean I'm against advancing optical technology. On the contrary. If anything, it's better to have something better, than not. That's why they call it better :p. It's just that i'm not impressed anymore, and so are most of the people i think, because it doesn't make much of a difference any more.
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
27. December 2005 @ 10:50 |
Link to this message
|
P.S.
Quote:
I think that the optical formats have been much more useful in the advancement of PCs than the floppy
It is quite difficult to judge the impact of different technologies in different time contexts. Personally, I wouldn't easily compare such different technologies, in so different times.
Remember, that those days, floppies was the ONLY way to transfer data across computers. Alongside with optical technology, you have networks and other portable media.
By no means do I suggest ofcourse, that the floppy was better, or more meaningful. I just state that comparing them is rather unseemly. Floppy's meaning to an i8088 is totally different to that of a DVD for today's computer.
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. December 2005 @ 10:51
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
27. December 2005 @ 14:06 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
It is quite difficult to judge the impact of different technologies in different time contexts. Personally, I wouldn't easily compare such different technologies, in so different times.
Wouldn't or couldn't, makes little difference. Anyone older than their teens or early twenties would have seen a shift from reel tapes for mainframes to floppies for PCs, and then CDs and later DVDs. Improvements in the equipment and the portable media used; I can even make easy comparisons on the earlier PCs as compared to the ones we use today. Anyone for toggling switches as an interface? Over the span of 20 years or so PCs have moved from glorified word processors with math skills to a much more diverse tool. PC development and the accompanying technologies have moved society farther technologically than it has during any other short interval in the past. If we still had those older systems and wanted to remain complacent, we'd not be talking about developments or what's coming next. Me, I can easily make comparisons, because these changes are occurring over a span of a few years, not centuries.
|
|
rick5446
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. December 2005 @ 14:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
My first Pentium was a 75 Mghrz W/1.5 Gig HDD,wow WAS IT FAST..BOUGHT AN extra HDD 3GIG..on sale at COMP USA $190.00
|
|
forkndave
Member
|
27. December 2005 @ 15:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
My first PC was a 486 S(U)X 25 MHz with a 128 MB hard drive. I guess it was faster than my Commodore 64 which was faster than my VIC-20.
Dave
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
27. December 2005 @ 15:49 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Me, I can easily make comparisons, because these changes are occurring over a span of a few years, not centuries.
By no means did I imply that you as a person were unable to make, or not, any kind of comparisons. Nor that it was a matter of age either.
I am too speaking of progress in portable media. That's my whole point. Of that progress, of things that are needed only to become obsolete.
I never said nor implied whatsoever that any advancent made is not part of advance in itself. Just like you state
Quote:
[...]a shift from reel tapes for mainframes to floppies for PCs, and then CDs and later DVDs.
But for an exception. The key steps in portable media evolution, involve a much greater change than that of CDs to DVDs. I don't think that you would argue that reel tapes to floppies, or floppies to CDs, seems analogous to CD/DVD.
In that remark, did i argue that DVD/blu-HD would be as much of a progress as the CD/DVD.
Where I think your wrong lies, is in judging the media just in their technical specs, out of their historic context. And by 'historic' I do not by any means imply "ancient" or some other spand of time. I mean in the context of their present time, not this. You're comparing "floppies today" with "DVDs today". That is a fine way to choose what is best for you TODAY.
I suggested that if you want to compare something's meaning, or impact, you have to do it in the context of its time. What floppy means today little has to make with what it meant when it were needed.
That is why when you recite some 'outstanding] key advances in portable media, you only mention 'reel tapes' and 'floppies'. You don't mention single or double layer floppies. Double or High density. Oh, I assure you, high density disk were a tad more expensive in their beginning but quite a relief from the piling double density ones. Everyone had them sooner or later.
What High Density disks was to Double Density then, such is a DVD to a CD today. OK we have another step now. A third one. Sure it is a step, and we're going to take it. For it is indeed a step upwards.
And I also believe that some steps are indeed bigger than others. The one that move off one "phase" to another. Just like the one that the CD-ROM took us with moving from "floppy disks" to "optical disks".
In that sense, I think that it is time we needed of a step from "optical disks" to some other format. Not a step IN "optical disks".
Surely the blu or HD will happen, it will be something "good" and most propably it will "take over" all the older ones.
But it will still be just a step IN "optical disks".
We need a step TO something other. That is what I am arguing about.
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. December 2005 @ 15:51
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
27. December 2005 @ 16:57 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
PC development and the accompanying technologies have moved society farther technologically than it has during any other short interval in the past.
Do you think it's over yet? I mean the "age of the computers"?
I think not. I think that they are still bringing us a lot of changes, and we are far yet from seeing where it is going to stop.
If you do aswell believe this, then we are by no means to know how "short" this interval is going to be, if short at all, since we do not yet know of its full length.
Still if you are to mention such a significant thing, would you compare for us "rennaisance" or "industrial revolution" to the "age of computer" if it were so easy for you to compare, and conclude that the "age of computers" has indeed "[...]moved society farther technologically than it has during any other short interval in the past[...]".
Look, by asking you that i'm not stating the opposite. I.e. that the "Age of computers" is of lesser significance than any other. Or generally if indeed your statement is right or wrong. I just think that in some of your comparisons, you are neglecting a big part of the "aspect" as it seems to me that you are making them "too easily". In the special case of your last statemnt, as for the whole "computer age" thing, in order to fully comprehend its [the "computer age"'s] significance, you have to be over it, to see the results.
Something has to have come to its peak, so that you can see its real results. I do not think that we have seen the peak of computer progress and its age, so that we would compare its meaning.
BTW yes, "would" and "could" mean quite a different thing.
In no way does someone willing to do something, mean he is capable of doing it, nor that someone capable of doing something is willing to do it. Willing to and being capable of are totally different things.
And in believing that we should better keep the thoughts of our own, or of other's, capabilities to ourselves, i prefer to use "would" than "could".
As a courtesy of respect to another's capabilites, thus avoiding to take it down to a dull personal level where no gain is to be found. We all know of who we are and little difference does it make, what one says about himself, or others.
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. December 2005 @ 17:01
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
27. December 2005 @ 19:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
I try not to speak in the "profound", so don't read things in to what I say that aren't there. I said the PC has brought about a technical change. Nowhere did I mention the end of the world tomorrow. Barring any major catastrophes, I'm sure society will progress; and it appears to be tech oriented. When I mentioned reel tapes and ended with DVDs, that was a progression from years past to present. No comparisons between individual steps, just a progression from a few years past to the present.
Just so you know, I'm not trying to argue. I was just trying to figure out what you were saying. I heard it said, "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with BS." So far, I'm being baffled by someone who appears to enjoy seeing their words on a forum. What in the world are you trying to say? Put it in a few sentences so we can understand your focus. So far you've managed to baffle us with your "bull" to the point no one has an idea where you're coming from.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. December 2005 @ 19:25
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
27. December 2005 @ 20:15 |
Link to this message
|
SlitanJ
This is a forum for discussing media, not our "profound" observations of past accomplishments and what we personally think is needed for the future. Blu-Ray and HD DVD are already in the works. It's now a matter of seeing which, if not both go mainstream. Reminds one of the VHS-Beta dispute of years past. I occasionally refer to them in a cautionary stance. Reminds me of my Zip drive I don't use. I just try to warn people to not buy until they're sure what is going to be the standard. I'm not making judgment calls on the equipment itself. That's to come when it is out there and we have people commenting on it. "It" being whatever is being used.
You said we don't need a new CD-Rom and I agreed on a technicality (as long as it was just playing CDs). Considering you moved on to optical discs as a whole, then a new disc and player is what is called for. Maybe not for our current needs or for everyone, but shortly we'll be wanting the new high definition movies. Even games are moving upwards of the DVD5 capacity. It won't be a situation where a person has to, or really needs to buy in to the advancement right off. Just as a person doesn't need to go from a CD burner to DVD unless they feel the need. I prefer my DVD backups to the quality of SVCD. CD RW drives weren't cheap when they first came out and neither was DVD RW. It would be miraculous if the new higher capacity drives aren't high priced as well.
We still have floppies, cds, dvds, and dl dvds for our portable backup needs. Those will be with us when the newer high capacity discs and players come out. Just looking at common sense usage, the mega drives aren't going to be for what we think of as regular backup tasks. To get to the brass tacks of the situation, it's simply a matter of money. What will we pay for as far as storage and media playback are concerned? Also, if it can't be mass marketed at a reasonable price, then the merchandise gets set aside as a niche market.
It was mentioned it doesn't make sense to buy a burner without DL capability. The other side of the coin is that it doesn't make sense to buy DL media at current prices. It's coming down, so it will soon be within most users grasp. Funny though, the next step in the evolution of the optical disc has taken place while we've waited. Wonder how far we'll go before they get those Blu-Ray and/or HD DVD prices down.
Which brings us back to this forum, since it's on media. We're here to discuss problematic media, not theory and history. Though the occasional distraction can be entertaining. Reporting bad media is the main theme. Then we like to hear of the occasional success story to offset all the gloom and doom and where to pick up a good buy or dodge a bad one. However, if you want to keep going with the "baffling" rhetoric, you need to go to the General Discussion section on the forum board.
|
Senior Member
|
28. December 2005 @ 04:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
brobear- ZIP DRIVES ah! yes the Click of DEATH !!!!!!!!!!!! click click click !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 04:31 |
Link to this message
|
look brobear, just take a step back, and re-read what has been said.
For all I know, reading the this thread, which you are right is about problematic media -the reason why I started to read it myself in the firstplace-, i saw you and some others going on the subject of DL discs and writers kai blu-HD ones. If you were going to buy them, if you could do without them. I don't think I need to quote specific parts for you to acknowledge that.
I wrote a remark on that exact conversation. If you think that it was my remark that "intruded" on "your" web space, as I am the n00b in this forum, then I'll just apologize, stfu and leave.
Little difference does it make to me continuing our conversation. I was just feeling like talking and I thought I would enjoy sharing my opinion and learn the opinion of others.
From the two of us, i think you are the one who tries to read too much in the posts of the other, and as a reaction to that i try to write in the most unambiguous way that i can.
If you are to say that something of mine was bullshit, you could just aswell quote it and show where the bullshit is. By makeing statements of Quote:
"If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with BS."
what are you really expecting to accomplish?
for all I know a started speaking of a very specific matter, and you were the one who brought up tha "general progress", comparing "the miracle of computers" in the whole of society's progress and accomplishments.
I have no trouble speaking of whatever the subject you choose to bring up. But YOU were the one who brought it up. Not me.
Just like when you say Quote:
Nowhere did I mention the end of the world tomorrow. Barring any major catastrophes
Who DID mention catastrophes or the end of the world, so that you respond to that? I certainly never have.
If you've heard about the bullshit thing, then you surely have also heard that answering to things never addressed, is taking the easy way out of what is really addressed.
I said that the blu-HD advance is a minor advance in portable media progress, and that I think we are in need of a more major one. And i said why.
I begun my post by saying Quote:
First of all I too do think the next-gen optical drives will be a significant progress. Great increase in space and somewhat in speed.
As is the DVD9 somewhat like.
I think that its meaning is clear enough.
Then i said Quote:
But I do too to think of their's not-so-usefulness. In the not-so-worthy of my money way.
Not useless, not unworthy, but how worthy and useful.
Then i stated what i considered problems, and benefits.
At last I stated what I would think of a new media to be needing of.
I brought up the floppy thing, to mention WHAT "features" of a floppy were quite good.(and what quite BAD)
YOu answered by saying that floppies are dead, and that we should embrace new technology for it brings benefits.
Quote:
I think I'd rather give up the floppies.
Quote:
all I can say is, give em up and join the rest of the world in the 21st century. Anybody want some old floppies?
Can you really tell me why on earth did you feel compelled to write such things?
I never said otherwise.
As a matter of fact I did say those same things in my first post.
Alongside with that, you stated Quote:
I think that the optical formats have been much more useful in the advancement of PCs than the floppy
bringing up a comparison which I thought problematic, so that i answered to that aswell.
Seeing that, you were answering to different things than the ones I was mentioning, I restated in what I thought of a more unambiguous way, what I meant.
Quote:
"Hey don't get me wrong. Today's floppy is next to useless,"
"Ofcourse optical technology was very much needed."
"I wasn't saying any different from you brobear : " Point being, useful technology gets dated and becomes less useful."
Optical technology was a great advance in so many ways."
That was a try to let the whole arguing thing go, cause i was suspecting it was going down the road of argument for the sake of argument. I simply stated a clear cut thing and you were starting to answer to things I NEVER SAID.
I restated my only expressed opinion again.
"But IMHO new advances in that area are starting to become less useful by the step"
Since YOU were fond of comparisons and of facts, as when i stated "facts" you would rather answer with comparisons, i thought it might be because you were grasping comparisons better. That is why a made some comparisons to show what i was saying.
Quote:
CD-R as compared to to a floppy was quite a great deal. As they say great quantitive differnces become qualitive ones. DVD's in comparison with CD's was an appreciable change, if not for games and movies. Still, I think it was a much lesser change as it was with the floppy-CD one. The DVD->blu/HD, i think is an even lesser one. The benefits we gain, in no way address their problems, and that is why people are getting less and less eager to aquire them.
Am I saying there are no benfits form the blu-HD ? Am I saying that I do not want them? Am I saying that they will not "come"?
NO. I am just saying advance in optical media is becoming less and less of a real change. The steps are getting minor and minor, and I think we need a more radical one.
In the whole "is blu ray really that much needed or do we need of something more" you brought up a comparison o floppy to DVD (and optical media in general), let alone implying that i believed that floppies are good for today.
Then, so to show that your other statement of the floppy dvd comparison was a whole different matter, I addressed it in a seperate post. By indicating PS, i tried to not make it of great importance, as the convestation was on something different.
Yet YOU chose to address that, instead of everything other.
I said that comparing floppy's IMPACT on the "computer world" to "DVD IMPACT in the computer world" is quite more complicated than comparing them in a purely technical aspect.
If you can't understand something i said, you are quite welcome to quote it, and ask.
What do you reply to that?
Quote:
PC development and the accompanying technologies have moved society farther technologically than it has during any other short interval in the past.
Quote:
Anyone older than their teens or early twenties would have seen a shift from reel tapes for mainframes to floppies for PCs, and then CDs and later DVDs.
Quote:
Me, I can easily make comparisons, because these changes are occurring over a span of a few years, not centuries.
Seeing that now you were taking it a bit too personal, i stated that nothing personal was implied. Not about your age or anything other.
Quote:
By no means did I imply that you as a person were unable to make, or not, any kind of comparisons. Nor that it was a matter of age either.
Yet once again I try to bring our attention to what was addressed in the first place. The significance of the blu-HD advance.
Yet once again i try to understand from what you write, what you are willing to understand.
So I quote you "
Quote:
Quote:
[...]a shift from reel tapes for mainframes to floppies for PCs, and then CDs and later DVDs.
and say
Quote:
you only mention 'reel tapes' and 'floppies'. You don't mention single or double layer floppies. Double or High density.
so that maybe you were to understand that you might actually agree with what I was all along saying on the part of the hd-blu advancement.
That there are key-changes and "simple ones". That's why we only remember of key ones.
I concluded by once again restating the only thing i wished all along to state
Quote:
In that sense, I think that it is time we needed of a step from "optical disks" to some other format. Not a step IN "optical disks".
Surely the blu or HD will happen, it will be something "good" and most propably it will "take over" all the older ones.
But it will still be just a step IN "optical disks".
We need a step TO something other. That is what I am arguing about.
Yet still it remains the only thing you refrain from answering to.
Of course in your then last post you chose (as it seems you are always so willing to) to bring up yet another, ever more general and off topic subject.
Quote:
PC development and the accompanying technologies have moved society farther technologically than it has during any other short interval in the past.
I still fail to see, what made you refer to such a subject, since no implication to that had been made, nor did it answer to anything stated.
As i said, I'm willing to discuss whatever the topic you may choose. ANd since you made a statement, I answered.
Of course I made a completely diffent post, because i thought of it a totally different subject.
As a matter of fact, i did not state my position on that matter because i do too think is a very complicated one, in need of great explanations and historical facts, so far away from a techie forum. I just asked of you to consider what other significant changes in society have been made, and why you were so easily ruling that one of them was the greatest of all. I also stated why I think we shouldn't yet deal with the impact of computers in society, as it something not concluded YET.
Yet once again i meet a post that i try to understand what it is answering to. You answering to accusations of end of the world and such.
I over and over, again again, restated in a most clear way what i was saying. I hope my quoting will help you in understanding that.
Now between me and you, i don't believe I was the one baffling with bull, but you who were bringing up irrelevant and more general topics.
You were the one to bring up implications and society's progress, the effect of ages and comparisons.
Quote:
So far, I'm being baffled
You're only baffled by yourself trying to avoid remaining on such a simple topic, by bringing up ever more complicated ones.
Quote:
someone who appears to enjoy seeing their words on a forum.
Such enjoyment can only come from places where it actually matters. Here is hardly such a place.
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. December 2005 @ 04:45
|
Moderator
|
28. December 2005 @ 04:37 |
Link to this message
|
@SlitanJ -
Quote:
Such enjoyment can only come from places where it actually matters. Here is hardly such a place
- this is such a place. How about i jump in here and ask this "good grief, how about you just write a simple paragraph" instead of The Hobbit.
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. December 2005 @ 04:37
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 04:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
OK creaky.
My wrong.
Your forum.
Just delete my every post.
Take care.
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
|
Senior Member
|
28. December 2005 @ 05:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
creaky- nice animation CHEERS!
|
Moderator
|
28. December 2005 @ 05:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
@SlitanJ
it's not my forum :)
..and no i'm not here to remove all your replies. i haven't even read most of it as there's so much there. i simply jumped in as a mediator then saw war and peace/crossed words, that's all :)
@BIGTOXY69 - yup, phantom69 sure has a talent for gif's
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. December 2005 @ 05:13
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 05:24 |
Link to this message
|
Creaky
Thank you. I asked for a couple of lines to define the focus of SlitanJ's treatise on "how to baffle" and got more of the same.
Quote:
I was just feeling like talking and I thought I would enjoy sharing my opinion and learn the opinion of others... Such enjoyment can only come from places where it actually matters. Here is hardly such a place.
SlitanJ
Sounded like you were on a roll and was enjoying yourself. LOL Too bad it was so convoluted as to be almost unintelligible or was it my imagination you were contradicting yourself. As Creaky pointed out, you must have been enjoying yourself. Was that treatise on "how to baffle" our punishment for being bad children this year?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. December 2005 @ 06:00
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 05:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
BIGTOXY69
I can speak from experience when I say, Zip wasn't the way to go. LOL
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 05:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
look brobear.
If you can quote a single illegible self contradicting statement, do it.
Just saying it, is plain stupid.
My last big post was a recap of our whole conversation pointing out with quotes, who's on the bulshitting side.
Then again, it seems that is MY way of sorting things out. Refering to reality.
Yours as it seems is the one of empty personal statements.
Good for you.
Having to quote every single thing only because someone is unable to stick on what is posted, is hardly my enjoyment.
If you believe that your writings can go as far as being posted on some forum so it's there where you seek enjoyment in seeing them, then I'll either feel sorry for you, or hope you have a long way before you.
In any case, try not to judge other's intentions by your own.
I am sorry things got down to that.
P.S. No more punishment needed for you. No need to burden your existence with anything more than itself.
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. December 2005 @ 05:46
|
Senior Member
|
28. December 2005 @ 05:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
brobear- yes oh wise and gentle bear ! I never owned one Because I felt CDR media offered more storage at a cheaper price & also having read the INFAMOUS( Click of Death !) article in A computer mag who's name eludes me at present !But I am sorry for your loss none the less ! Hey we all make mistakes ! To Err is human ! the trick is try not to make the same one twice right ! And as smart as you are now apparently have learned much since ! which is good news for us ! Besides who in their right mind would want to P*** off a bear ( ROAR !!!!!!!!!!!! Smack !!!!! GROWL !!!!!!!!) LOL! just kidding ! Good LucK , Happy Burning ! , & Happy New years !
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 06:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
Have a good one BIGTOXY69.
SlitanJ
I'll miss those pithy comments. LOL
|
|
rick5446
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
28. December 2005 @ 11:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
Lets all kiss & make up..& get back on trac here..PLeeeeease
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 12:47 |
Link to this message
|
oh well, you know I can't leave you unhappy bear, so if you're missing my comments, here's yet another one. One left out by mistake.
Look. I hope you are unaware of quoting in a proper way.
You see, when you quote something in "a single piece of quotes", like
Quote:
I was just feeling like talking and I thought I would enjoy sharing my opinion and learn the opinion of others... Such enjoyment can only come from places where it actually matters. Here is hardly such a place.
it means it was stated as quoted.
If you want to show, as an hounest "quotor" that you have omitted something, you place three dots inside brackets. Like [...]. I suppose you just forgot about the brackets.
Still, when you omitt something from a quoted text, it is quite expected to be of something short and irrelevent to the actually quoted text. That is implied by the indication of omission.
Here, in your most accurate quotes, we have [omission] and then something which starts with : Such.
I wonder where that "such" referred to.But, am i stupid?, but ofcourse Mr Brobear would never have omited something that would mislead me to believe anything other than just the previous thing he had written, under the same quotes. That the "such" referred to the "enjoy sharing my opinion".
That sli-fucker's surely contradicting himself, brobear's right.
But is it really so?
I'll just paste another quote. What do you say of that one?
Quote:
[...]I thought I would enjoy sharing my opinion[...]
[...]
Quote:
someone who appears to enjoy seeing their words on a forum.
Such enjoyment can only come from places where it actually matters. Here is hardly such a place.
Are you able to understand the difference of "joy" to "joy", or is this yet again another profound buff of bullshit?
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
|
|
SlitanJ
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 13:11 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
he he.
Only now in the end do i understand.
You were all quite right.
I am beginning to enjoy this.
Machine, so in itself being a great power in diminishing labour and creating goods, so does it bring excessive harshness and hunger.
In a fate's weird vice, new sources of fortune, transform to one's of suffering.
K.M.
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
28. December 2005 @ 16:34 |
Link to this message
|
SlitanJ
Quote:
he he.
Only now in the end do i understand.
You were all quite right.
I am beginning to enjoy this.
Now if you just had something worth saying... such as addressing the subject matter of this thread. Just being coherent would help. So far, you've entertained yourself with senseless juvenile rantings that leave other foum members wondering what in the world you were trying to say.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. December 2005 @ 16:48
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Buik
Member
|
28. December 2005 @ 17:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
Good Lord. The "KISS" principle should have prevailed. That there have only been marginal increases in any sort of storage media over the years is a moot point. The fact remains that there has always been progress.
We keep pushing the envelope. And we eventually succeed. Not always at a break neck speed, but we do.
Where are we today when a floppy disc was 1.44mb? Remember their predecessor? 720 kb? (a true floppy).
I also, like the advantage of being able to transport data via a solid state USB drive. Just wish that I did not have to have one big enough to also contain operational versions of my OS and applications.
Everyone take a "Chill Pill" and enjoy the site, forums and services. Let's not get too intense. Life is too short and stress kills. That we can't always get along only exemplifies our humanity.
Happy New Year
TC
|
|
