« February 18, 2007 - February 24, 2007 | Home | March 4, 2007 - March 10, 2007 »

Week of February 25, 2007 - March 3, 2007

Mac vs PC


This post was spawned by the mac commercial nonsense over on Eschaton. I switched, for work, some time ago to a Macbook pro. I have to say, there's a lot of it that I love--the OS is much more stable, easier to use, etc. MSFT products run fine (there's only so fast that a word processor needs to be), and once they get into universal binary, I'm sure that they'll be better. And Entourage is a much nicer version of outlook.

Here are my main complaints:

1. they ship with far too little memory. They have to be close to maxed out to get anything compaprable to PC performance. I found this to be true especially when running Office applications. That said, for running MSFT applications, PCs are nonetheless generally faster.

2. Safari is crap. It won't let you save to specific folders (which is a huge pain when you download documents all the time). You have to save them to the desktop and then move them.

3. Firefox (which is what I use) does. The problem with Firefox is that the legal research sites don't write for that browser (on the mac), and hence some key functionality is disabled. My main beef is the "snip and clip" function--on a PC, you can simply highlight part of a case, and have the quote plus the cite inserted into a document. Safari won't let you get the quote, but it does pull the cite. Firefox does neither on the mac, but the functionality works for the PC version. That's a beef with the websites more than the mac, but it's a cost of using the mac.

How Reliable Is Israeli Intelligence?


In Seymour Hersh's current New Yorker story, "The Redirection", Hersh reports:

"The Administration is now examining a wave of new intelligence on Iran’s weapons programs. Current and former American officials told me that the intelligence, which came from Israeli agents operating in Iran, includes a claim that Iran has developed a three-stage solid-fuelled intercontinental missile capable of delivering several small warheads—each with limited accuracy—inside Europe..."

How reliable is Israeli intelligence? Not very, based on the last go-round.

From an 8/17/02 New York Daily News story, "Attack Iraq soon, says Sharon aide", by Richard Sisk:

"WASHINGTON - The United States should attack Iraq soon to stop dictator Saddam Hussein from developing nuclear weapons, Israeli officials said yesterday.

"Postponing the action to a later date would only enable Saddam to accelerate his weapons program, and then he would pose a more formidable threat," said Ranaan Gissin, a top adviser to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

Gissin said Sharon sent the U.S. Israeli intelligence estimates this week that Saddam had boosted production of chemical and biological weapons in anticipation of war with the U.S.

Gissin also charged Saddam ordered Iraq's Atomic Energy Commission last week to speed up work on developing nuclear weapons.

"Saddam's going to be able to reach a point where these weapons will be operational," he said.

The Israeli view contrasted with growing Republican opposition to President Bush's pursuit of a so-called regime change in Iraq.

At his Crawford, Tex., ranch, Bush took note of the "healthy debate." Top Republicans, including former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft, have warned that an attack on Iraq would derail the war on terrorism.

"I listen carefully," Bush said.

But, he said of Saddam, "There should be no doubt in anybody's mind that this man is thumbing his nose at the world" and "that he desires weapons of mass destruction."

Israel fears Scud attacks

In deciding on whether to go to war, Bush said, "I'll be making up my mind based upon the latest intelligence and how best to protect our own country, plus our friends and allies."

Israeli Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer said Saddam almost certainly would aim Scuds again at Israeli cities if the U.S. attacked, as happened during the Gulf War in 1991.

"We will be one of the main targets," Ben-Eliezer told the Yediot Ahronot newspaper. Israel did not retaliate in 1991, but Ben-Eliezer said the military would respond to new attacks.

"What I told the Americans, and I repeat it: 'Don't expect us to continue to live with the process of restraint. If they hit us, we reserve the right of response,'" Ben-Eliezer said.

In recent months, Iraq has sent mixed signals about whether it will allow the return of United Nations weapons inspectors who left in 1998.

Iraqi UN Ambassador Mohammad Al-Douri said yesterday that his country had renewed an invitation for the inspectors "to discuss practical arrangements for their work ahead in the future."

« February 18, 2007 - February 24, 2007 | Home | March 4, 2007 - March 10, 2007 »

rumpole

user-pic

Following:
Followers: 4

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

  • Favorite Quotes when Brian Williams is asking me about what's a personal thing that you've done [that's green], and I say, you know, 'Well, I planted a bunch of trees.' And he says, 'I'm talking about personal.' What I'm thinking in my head is, 'Well, the truth is, Brian, we can't solve global warming because I f---ing changed light bulbs in my house. It's because of something collective'." --Barack Hussein Obama

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address