Khleerm

Thanks for calling me ignorant. I've been in the IT business for way way too long, since the PC was doing only 4.7 MHz, harddisks were rare, and RAM was only 512k. I really love it when people show their wisdom and call me ignorant. Comments like yours are also very inflammatory. Man, the trolls are really coming out in this thread.

Uh-huh. And Rumsfeld lambasted the whole world by insisting there was a plan for executing a war and another for a peace. Coincidentally, he was also able to speak from having years and years of prior experience. As well, coincidentally, he suffered no challenges to his wise leadership either. So you go right ahead- apologise for him while you're at it- and tell me how cocksure you are of your Admin skills and we'll believe you because you insisted it is so. The only fly in your soup is you're pontificating on a platform that is alien to you.

ignorant (as in "ignorant") adj.: lacking basic knowledge; "how can someone that age be so ignorant?"; "inexperienced and new to the real world"

I remain just as cock sure you couldn't invoke Expose on your sisters computer were you asked to. And I'm just as sure you're unaware of Dashboard, or Fast User Switching, or navigating the Finder, of configuring Samba, or BonJour, or using the Airport Admin tool. Nor have you any knowledge of navigation via keyboard shortcuts of either the desktop or apps. running on the desktop. Until you do you are simply too ignorant to comment with authority, let alone prove you have so much as even a basic understanding of the two platforms.

Some time ago, I read a similar thread where this same challenge to your actual knowledge of that sisters computer occurred. And, just as now, you got defensive then but failed the debate. What you failed to see then and no doubt fail again to see is that, genuine awareness does not simply happen because you interacted on some foreign desktop for some miniscule days.

Mac OSX 10.4.x aka Tiger is a great operating system, it was on par with XP.[/i]

When first you say this ^ you've already lost the credibility that allows us to believe you're as knowledgeable as to do all of this \/ And that is all that needs to be said.

Boy some people here get overexcited. I myself use both Mac OSX and Vista (and also some Linux variants like Suse and Ubuntu). For me this discussion is pointless, but I cannot resist offering my thoughts and comments. My preferred OS is Vista, most of the applications I need to run do run there. Also in my line of work I need to administer Windows 2003 server (active directory) and Novell (6.5) This is very hard on Mac OSX, not on Vista.

This kind of immaturity belongs in the fourth grade. Name calling over what OS you use is pretty lame.

Not nearly so lame as your incessant proctoring of the IT forum. Why you must fit the same profile as a security guard with a badge fetish.

So he used the weenie word. Dear me... Was your innocence fractured? Did that call for you having to badger him with your twaddling thread spam? Say, here's novel idea- let readers interpret the commentary.

Was Cobrasnakenecktie' main point lost on you as the gasket blew? Allow me to the pleasure, he wrote " Its funny to hear Windows weenies talking about the Mac being too simple." And indeed this thread bears the fruit of that tree. The comments made by sjaak327 and Firefoxx both betray their complete ignorance on this topic. Did that stop them from commenting? No.

Mac OSX 10.4.x aka Tiger is a great operating system, it was on par with XP.

Yes, I've tried Tiger.....To tell you the truth, I didn't like it.

More news on the Vista EULA -

From the: Parallels Virtualization Blog

Note: This applies to Mac users of Parrallels Desktop.

Be aware of these restrictions for running Vista on Parrallels.

"Here's the technical legalese from the EULAs:

For Vista Home Basic and Home Premium Editions:

“USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.”

For Vista Enterprise and Ultimate Editions:

“USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device. If you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications protected by any Microsoft digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or using applications protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other rights management services or using full volume disk drive encryption.”

In short, this means that if you’re a user and you want to run Vista virtually, you MUST buy the highest end versions of Vista, or you’ll be in violation of the Microsoft EULA.

Vista gives a view of a new world

Internet law professor Michael Geist casts an eye over the fine print in Windows Vista and is concerned at what he finds.

From the BBC

Vista, the latest version of Microsoft Windows has made its long awaited consumer debut. It incorporates a new, sleek look and such novelties as better search tools and stronger security.

Early reviews have tended to dam* the upgrade with faint praise, however, characterising it as the best, most secure version of Windows, yet one that contains few, if any, revolutionary features.

While those reviews have focused chiefly on new functions, for the past few months the legal and technical communities have dug into Vista's "fine print".

Those communities have raised red flags about Vista's legal terms and conditions as well as the technical limitations built in to the software at the insistence of the motion picture industry.

Hard look

The net effect of these concerns may constitute the real Vista revolution as they point to an unprecedented loss of consumer control over their own PCs.

In the name of shielding consumers from computer viruses and protecting copyright owners from potential infringement, Vista seemingly wrestles control of the "user experience" from the user.

Vista's legal fine print includes extensive provisions granting Microsoft the right to regularly check the legitimacy of the software and holds the prospect of deleting certain programs without the user's knowledge.

During the installation process, users "activate" Vista by associating it with a particular computer or device and transmitting certain hardware information directly to Microsoft.

Even after installation, the legal agreement grants Microsoft the right to revalidate the software or to require users to reactivate it should they make changes to their computer components.

For those users frustrated by the software's limitations, Microsoft cautions that "you may not work around any technical limitations in the software".

Michael Geist

In addition, it sets significant limits on the ability to copy or transfer the software, prohibiting anything more than a single backup copy and setting strict limits on transferring the software to different devices or users.

Vista also incorporates Windows Defender, a security program that actively scans computers for "spyware, adware, and other potentially unwanted software". The agreement does not define any of these terms, leaving it to Microsoft to determine what constitutes unwanted software.

Once operational, the agreement warns that Windows Defender will, by default, automatically remove software rated "high" or "severe" even though that may result in other software ceasing to work or mistakenly result in the removal of software that is not unwanted.

For greater certainty, the terms and conditions remove any doubt about who is in control by providing that "this agreement only gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights".

For those users frustrated by the software's limitations, Microsoft cautions that "you may not work around any technical limitations in the software".

Those technical limitations have proven to be even more controversial than the legal ones.

Image problem

In December 2006, Peter Gutmann, a computer scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand released a paper called "A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection".

The paper pieced together the technical fine print behind Vista, unraveling numerous limitations in the new software seemingly installed at the direct request of Hollywood.

Mr Gutmann focused primarily on the restrictions associated with the ability to play high-definition content from the next-generation Blu-Ray and HD-DVD discs (referred to as "premium content"). He noted that Vista intentionally degrades the picture quality of premium content when played on most computer monitors.

Mr Gutmann's research suggests that consumers will pay more for less with poorer picture quality yet higher costs since Microsoft needed to obtain licenses from third parties in order to access the technology that protects premium content (those license fees were presumably incorporated into Vista's price).

Moreover, he calculated that the technological controls would require considerable consumption of computing power with the system conducting 30 checks each second to ensure that there are no attacks on the security of the premium content.

Microsoft responded to Mr Gutmann's paper earlier this month, maintaining that content owners demanded the premium content restrictions.

Said Microsoft: "If the policies [associated with the premium content] required protections that Windows Vista couldn't support, then the content would not be able to play at all on Windows Vista PCs."

While that may be true, left unsaid is Microsoft's ability to demand a better deal on behalf of its enormous user base or the prospect that users could opt-out of the technical controls.

When Microsoft introduced Windows 95 more than a decade ago, it adopted the Rolling Stones Start Me Up as its theme song. As millions of consumers contemplate the company's latest upgrade, the legal and technological restrictions may leave them singing You Can't Always Get What You Want.

Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law.

*******************************************************************

Comment: This author seems as concerned as I. To me, the key quote is, "Vista's legal fine print includes extensive provisions granting Microsoft the right to regularly check the legitimacy of the software and holds the prospect of deleting certain programs without the user's knowledge.

Granting that "holds the prospect" is purely speculation, it will be interesting to see if Microsoft becomes so brash.

I've played with most of the LiveCD distros and done so on numerous machines- both new and old- and the absolute most impressive distro is Knoppix

The lastest- 5.1.1 is superb at recognizing the network, attached third party hardware and can also browse NTFS partitions with ease and read and write to them. So it makes for a great rescue disk resource.

Remind your friend to go into their BIOS to enable booting from CD as well as booting the CD first in priority.

Prediction: Everyone will be using Vista in 18 months and no one will give a hoot about DRM & licensing. I remember the same stink around the Win2000 to XP release.

Now there's a wager in the making.... I disagree.

For those unaware upgraders, chagrined by the forfeiture of their XP license, the long lapse between Vista and the next release of the-Windows-OS-to-have will be time enough for them to have forgotten and forgiven, no doubt.

But, in the interim, people really DO just want a seamless user experience without having to think too much about nitty-gritty things like licenses. People expect 'plug and play' today. Which is why I think, in the next 18 months, there will be many who get stung by DRM. I say there will be a measurable increase in frustration at their upcoming 'plug-n-license-restriction-DON'T-play' experience.

However significant or insignificant that may turn out, they are still saddled with the choice of ownership for several more years.

I'm not going to dump on macs in retaliation because I like both

Such a kind and benevolent platform agnosticator you are. Users are fair game, but leave the hardware out of it. Is that it? A rather amusing stance you have there...

the way in which Vista handles DRM, the bias is heavily in favor of Microsoft's business partners.

Apparently if you buy an upgrade version of Windows Vista for your XP machine, Windows Vista will invalidate your XP key

I would now like to solicit your opinions: Do you agree with this new license agreement by Micro$oft, or not?

Good god, I can't believe the freakin panic about Vista....

[/b]

Oh, another self-congratulatory Apple user dumping on MS....what a shock [/b]

On the contrary, there was no mention here of Vista's user experience, GUI, or stability. We have here a case of aggressive defense. The 'dumping on Ms' was a projection of your insecurity no doubt.

You are UPGRADING your previous software, not purchasing a new OS so I don't see what the problem is, I'm guessing it deactivates your old software to stop you running the old OS on another computer, which is fair enough IMO. I've never been a big fan of OS upgrades, I'm pretty sure most people purchase an OEM or Orginal copy.

That's the crux of it: I think the majority of upgraders will presume they are purchasing a new OS. Upgraders assume they're saving a bit by sprucing up their existing machine.

This new more aggressive business model necessitates a consumer reappraisal- buying a new machine with a new OS probably makes more sense, now, than upgrading.

Again, will the upgrade buyer be aware of the consequences....

Good god, I can't believe the freakin panic about Vista....

No panic here. And far be it from me to tell people which rat hole to dump their monies down....

But you can sure color me in disbelief that, activating an ugrade simultaneously deactivates your last purchase. The author of my second link appraises the move well, when he notes "Microsoft has gone down a path that restricts the user's options in ways that are less than desirable, in ways that involve inconvenience and a certain amount of ambiguity and unease for the consumer—just like its corporate software licensing practices do."

I suspect many people will have no idea of what are the implications between purchasing upgrade version and the OEM.

Most (if not ALL) software IS licensed and NOT sold.

Now I would like to solicit YOUR opinion: Do you find Apple's licensing agreement "downright unconscionable" as well? Are you okay with that?

No, I do not. For one very good reason: When I do upgrade to Leopard, it's as good as guaranteed they won't be so draconian as to invalidate my Tiger disc and disallow my using that older version whenever I please.

What irks me about the new M$ business plan is their forcing obsolescence down the throats consumers throats.

So far, from what I've read of the way in which Vista handles DRM, the bias is heavily in favor of Microsoft's business partners. So I'm assuming consumers will grow weary of the onerous nature of DRM, once the daily reality of Vista starts to set in. I thought that was bad enough....

But then today, I came across the new Vista License Terms, and these I find downright unconscionable. This new approach by Micro$oft, to me at least, is quite disturbing, though I'm sure many others won't care about the nitty gritty.

But I do imagine most savvy consumers will want to be made aware of this before they plunk down their money on Vista only to find their former Windows XP disc is now as useful as a coaster.

Here is the evidence to illustrate my point.

************************************************************************

[note: this links to a PDF file]

MICROSOFT LICENSE TERMS

WINDOWS VISTA HOME BASIC

WINDOWS VISTA HOME PREMIUM

WINDOWS VISTA ULTIMATE

8. SCOPE OF LICENSE. The software is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights.

************************************************************************

Now here are two articles that discuss this. The first is very compelling and worthy of consideration while the second is more illustrative, but does include bloggers commentary which might also be interesting to read:

Windows Vista's new spin on licensing Has among it's finer points, this to say:

"Microsoft has, for some time now, been moving slowly but intentionally toward a new model for consumer operating systems sales....where licensing is...to be "permission to use" rather than any kind of ownership."

************************************************************************

The second article, and I've found several others which affirm it, Upgrade to Vista, Lose Your XP Key? Informs us that, "Microsoft has set a lot of restrictions on Vista, but if this latest one holds true, it could mean the difference between upgrading or not for some people. Apparently if you buy an upgrade version of Windows Vista for your XP machine, Windows Vista will invalidate your XP key (so you won't be able to set up a dual-boot option nor will you be able to use that version of XP on another machine). Not only that, but if you ever uninstall Vista, you won't be able to fall back on your copy of XP anymore. Nice way to entice the upgraders, MS."

I would now like to solicit your opinions: Do you agree with this new license agreement by Micro$oft, or not? Will you upgraders to Vista agree to be leasees- and nothing more - accepting that you merely bought right(s) to use Vista? Or do you object? Your [consumer] opinions please..... What say you Thaivisa forum?

would a temple be a better place for displaying falluses than the clinic?

Why of course! There's one centuries still standing erect at the very center of Prasat Panom Rung, as of this very day. Has that one ever made the headlines due to objections of the public? I think not...

Religions, especially the Hindu deities, are afforded leniencies that businesses are not in many parts of the world.

Formerly a volume licencing copy didn't need to be activated....With vista this has been changed, You still use one cd, but each install needs to be activated. This can be done by something called a KMS server. Each 180 days vista will be activated. Now if an office is running more then 25 pc's they can actually deploy this KMS server themseleves.

There's some sharp lads at Fortune IT packaging workarounds for their shopping public. They've packaged a virtual machine image to foil this 180 day activation. I came upon it just a few weeks ago, it quite amazed me: the cleverness of their workaround.

I bet the power supply is fine but an internal fan has stopped working. Had that happen to me on two separate occasions with similar results.

First time was a simple fan failure and cured again with a replacement.

Second time it was a simple case of a gecko inserting themselves where they didn't belong. Poor little guy lost his life as a result.

Proof, again, of Thai intolerance, xenophobia and unwillingness to accept of other religions and races....

Hold on... It's a clinic, not a temple. People all around the world bristle at having a phallus waved in their face.

There's a very congenial doctor on Sukhumvit soi 11 who does them. His English is quite good. His clinic's main focus is on treating STDs, but he's very familiar with the medical certificates and does them for a nominal fee.

Coming in from Sukh., the clinic is on the left side, in a sub soi behind a 7-11 which is at the front of a charmingly quaint rural woodsy styled guesthouse. See: Suk 11 Guesthouse the picture on this page. If you pass the entrance to Ambassador Hotel you've gone too far down 11.

Yes siree, you know you're in deep poo, all right, when your staunchest devotees cross over to the competition. Yet it sure seems as though- despite their umpteen billions of dollars and untold man hours thrown at it- what they're packaging as their latest and greatest bit of shinola will in fact come to be seen as a nothing but a heaping pile of <deleted>.

If you thought Gutman's analysis was interesting, you'll love what this Tech Editor over at MIT Technology Review has to say after her test run of Vista:

Monday, January 08, 2007

Uninspiring Vista

How Microsoft's long-awaited operating system disappointed a stubborn fan.

By Erika Jonietz

For most of the last two decades, I have been a Microsoft apologist. I mean, not merely a contented user of the company's operating systems and software, not just a fan, but a champion. I have insisted that MS-DOS wasn't hard to use (once you got used to it), that Windows 3.1 was the greatest innovation in desktop operating systems, that Word was in fact superior to WordPerfect, and that Windows XP was, quite simply, "it."

When I was forced to use Apple's Mac OS (versions 7.6 through 9.2) for a series of jobs, I grumbled, griped, and insisted that Windows was better. Even as I slowly acclimated at work, I bought only Windows PCs for myself and avoided my roommate's recherché new iBook as if it were fugu. I admitted it was pretty, but I just knew that you got more computing power for your buck from an Intel-based Windows machine, and of course there was far more software available for PCs. Yet my adoration wasn't entirely logical; I knew from experience, for example, that Mac crashes were easier to recover from than the infamous Blue Screen of Death. At the heart of it all, I was simply more used to Windows. Even when I finally bought a Mac three years ago, it was solely to meet the computing requirements of some of the publications I worked with. I turned it on only when I had to, sticking to my Windows computer for everyday tasks.

So you might think I would be predisposed to love Vista, Microsoft's newest version of Windows, which was scheduled to be released to consumers at the end of January. And indeed, I leaped at the opportunity to review it. I couldn't wait to finally see and use the long-delayed operating system that I had been reading and writing about for more than three years. Regardless of widespread skepticism, I was confident that Vista would dazzle me, and I looked forward to saying so in print.

Ironically, playing around with Vista for more than a month has done what years of experience and exhortations from Mac-loving friends could not: it has converted me into a Mac fan.

A little context and a caveat: in order to meet print deadlines, I had to review the "RC1" version of Vista Ultimate, which Microsoft released in order to gather feedback from over-eager early adopters. Such post-beta, prerelease testing reveals bugs and deficits that in-house testing misses; debuggers cannot mimic all the various configurations of hardware, software, and peripherals that users will assemble. And Vista RC1 was maddeningly buggy. Although I reminded myself repeatedly that most of the problems I encountered would be fixed in the final version, my opinions about Vista are probably colored by my frustrations.

Still, my very first impression of Vista was positive. Quite simply, it's beautiful. The Aero visual interface provides some cool effects, such as translucent window borders and a way to scroll through a 3-D "stack" of your open windows to find the one you want. Networking computers is virtually automatic, as it was supposed to be but never quite has been with Windows XP. The Photo Gallery is the best built-in organizer I've used to manage digital pictures; it even includes basic photo correction tools.

But many of Vista's "new" features seemed terribly familiar to me--as they will to any user of Apple's OS X Tiger operating system. Live thumbnails that display petite versions of minimized windows, search boxes integrated into every Explorer window, and especially the Sidebar--which contains "Gadgets" such as a weather updater and a headline reader--all mimic OS X features introduced in 2005. The Windows versions are outstanding--they're just not really innovative.

Unfortunately, Vista RC1 contained bugs that rendered some promising features, such as the new version of Windows Media Center, unusable for me (an acquaintance who acquired a final copy of Vista ahead of release assures me that all that has been fixed).

My efforts to get Media Center working highlighted two big problems with Vista. First, it's a memory hog. The hundreds of new features jammed into it have made it a prime example of software bloat, perhaps the quintessence of programmer Niklaus Wirth's law that software gets slower faster than hardware gets faster (for more on the problems with software design that lead to bloat, see "Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Meta"). Although my computer meets the minimum requirements of a "Vista Premium Ready PC," with one gigabyte of RAM, I could run only a few ­simple programs, such as a Web browser and word processor, without running out of memory. I couldn't even watch a movie: Windows Media Player could read the contents of the DVD, but there wasn't enough memory to actually play it. In short, you need a hel_l of a computer just to run this OS.

Second, users choosing to install the 64-bit version of Vista on computers they already own will have a hard time finding drivers, the software needed to control hardware sub­systems and peripherals such as video cards, modems, or printers. Microsoft's Windows Vista Upgrade Advisor program, which I ran before installing Vista, assured me that my laptop was fully compatible with the 64-bit version. But once I installed it, my speakers would not work. It seems that none of the companies concerned had written a driver for my sound card; it took more than 10 hours of effort to find a workaround. Nor do drivers exist for my modem, printer, or several other things I rely on. For some of the newer components, like the modem, manufacturers will probably have released 64-bit drivers by the time this review appears. But companies have no incentive to write complicated new drivers for older peripherals like my printer. And because rules written into the 64-bit version of Vista limit the installation of some independently written drivers, users will be virtually forced to buy new peripherals if they want to run it.

Struggling to get my computer to do the most basic things reminded me forcefully of similar battles with previous versions of Windows--for instance, the time an MIT electrical engineer had to help me figure out how to get my computer to display anything on my monitor after I upgraded to Windows 98. Playing with OS X Tiger in order to make accurate comparisons for this review, I had a personal epiphany: Windows is complicated. Macs are simple.

This may seem extraordinarily obvious; after all, Apple has built an entire advertising campaign around the concept. But I am obstinate, and I have loved Windows for a long time. Now, however, simplicity is increasingly important to me. I just want things to work, and with my Mac, they do. Though my Mac barely exceeds the processor and memory requirements for OS X Tiger, every bundled program runs perfectly. The five-year-old printer that doesn't work at all with Vista performs beautifully with OS X, not because the manufacturer bothered to write a new Mac driver for my aging standby, but because Apple included a third-party, open-source driver designed to support older printers in Tiger. Instead of facing the planned obsolescence of my printer, I can stick with it as long as I like.

And my deepest-seated reasons for preferring Windows PCs--more computing power for the money and greater software availability--have evaporated in the last year. Apple's decision to use the same Intel chips found in Windows machines has changed everything. Users can now run OS X and Windows on the same computer; with third-party software such as Parallels Desktop, you don't even need to reboot to switch back and forth. The chip swap also makes it possible to compare prices directly. I recently used the Apple and Dell websites to price comparable desktops and laptops; they were $100 apart or less in each case. The difference is that Apple doesn't offer any lower-end processors, so its cheapest computers cost quite a bit more than the least-expensive PCs. As Vista penetrates the market, however, the slower processors are likely to become obsolete--minimizing any cost differences between PCs and Macs.

I may need Windows for a long time to come; many electronic gadgets such as PDAs and MP3 players can only be synched with a computer running Windows, and some software is still not available for Macs. But the long-­predicted migration of software from the desktop to the Internet is finally happening. Organizations now routinely access crucial programs from commercial Web servers, and consumers use Google's services to compose, edit, and store their e-mail, calendars, and even documents and spreadsheets (see "Homo Conexus," July/August 2006). As this shift accelerates, finding software that works with a particular operating system will be less of a concern. People will be able to base decisions about which OS to use strictly on merit, and on personal preference. For me, if the choice is between struggling to configure every feature and being able to boot up and get to work, at long last I choose the Mac.

Erika Jonietz is a Technology Review senior ­editor.

What an opportunity lost here, eh?

Gutman is quite prolofic, he continually updates the research here.

The source page of his work can be found here:

A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

Sandisk is the one to get. Assuming you want more than just file storage. Their U3 Smart Drive system is brilliant. You literally have the power and functionality of a portable Desktop in your hand. Your programs, widgets, server, security apps are all right there, ready to boot up once you plug it in.

As long as the host computer allows booting from the USB that is, if not, it's still a great storage medium for a Flash Driv.e

Short answer: Yes. Very similar to a sauna [with a fresh pail of water porn over the rocks].

A trilogy no less?! Wow! I can't wait....

when i travel nowadays i only go if i have a particular reason to, and not just for the sake of traveling.

What appeared at the end of my travel years as sameness, are now interesting cultural, political, social amd geographical inter-relations to be further investigated.

That's very appropos to my style. My colleague is twelve years my junior, which might well explain my disrespect.

paul theroux wrote some (in my opinion) great travel books in which basically he deplores travelling and travellors...

Those were some great points, bina, thank you! I don't think it was Theroux, but several years ago I saw a quote that jibes with his. It went something like this, "The difference between a traveller and a tourist is this: The traveller isn't sure where he is going whilst the tourist isn't at all sure where he's been."

Some of the most recent posts to this thread are alluding to the stark contrast therein.

Guesthouse scolded me for not recognizing that people are different. But he presumed wrong- I am and was aware of this. I have little respect for my colleagues view because I, like may of the older posters here, have mellowed in my age and I have no desire to keep score by ticking off this and that.

I prefer to stay put, too, and let a place and its' people infuse themselves in me. When I travel, I try to see, live, and feel their world through their eyes. For me, the destinations mean little while the journey means a whole lot. Maybe that's why I eschew itineraries- it could be said I plan to meander moreso than I plan to travel.

On a related note, if you can like a good song, try downloading a tune called "Every F#cking City" by the great Australian musician, Paul Kelly. Top song, very funny, and relates the ho-hum that travel can become.

Samran, thanks for sharing the song- it sounds hilariously cute. I can well imagine the chuckle he'd evoke were I to hear it. Perhaps I caught my colleague in such a mindset.

Sadly, I have no erudite remarks to make on this one.

Except to say that as he comes from a country where only around 5% of the population has a passport, who consider themselves well-travelled if they have flown from Los Angeles to Idaho, and most of whom's population would struggle to locate Miami on a map, let alone Myanmar, I think this guys deserves a bit of kudos.

Forgive me for not addressing that presumption earlier, but he's actually from Canada. And for whatever it's worth- I'm a Yank.

People are people. I don't get all the fuss about the guy?

Yes, they are. Having read all the responses [on topic] so far, however, I'd have to say the majority has been very kind to him. I'm the fussy one, and I'm clearly in the minority on this.

Why don't you go down to an authorised Apple dealer and see for yourself if you want to know "how is that?"?

In this day and age, what you pay for and what you get often times don't equate.

And since I did go to an Apple Store, Siam Paragon no less, not three weeks ago even, and did peruse the inventory quite thoroughly why don't you post a picture of your pride and joy.

I'll be delighted to apologize, if need be...