Re: suspend to disk unreliable?
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 08:42:02PM +0000, Camaleón wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 11:40:32 -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 04:00:57PM +0000, Camale�n wrote:
> >> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 16:11:03 +0200, lee wrote:
> >
> > .........snip.........
> >
> >> > And who would buy a car that comes with a certificate that only the
> >> > ppl named in the certificate are allowed to use it and that otherwise
> >> > the car might break down and any warranty is forfeited?
> >>
> >> Anyone here will :-)
> >
> > Excuse me but are you *really* saying that anyone "there" would buy a
> > car that only certain people can operate without voiding the warranty?
> > Where is there?
>
> Is not the "people" who drives the car but the "use" that people do with
> the car.
Of course it's ppl driving the car, it doesn't drive all by
itself. Everybodys driving conditions are different, and you don't get
a certificate that the car is suited for yours.
Just imagine your certified windoze computer: Does the certificate
name every piece of software and the version of the software, etc.,
you're allowed to run on it, and do you lose the warranty on your
computer when you dare to run some software that's not specified on
the certificate?
It's ppl using computers and running software on them; computers don't
run all by themselves, just like cars. Same is with refrigerators: You
don't get a certificate telling you exactly which goods you may put
into your fridge. But you expect your frigde to keep your goods cool,
and if it doesn't, you return it. It's just a piece of hardware, and,
again, it's that simple.
Reply to: