Slashdot Mirror

Well, I dont know about you, but I have been using multiple virtual desktops since 2kpro. Heck, MS even put them in the xp power toys package.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/Downloads/powertoys/Xppowertoys.mspx

I'm sorry, but as someone who mentions Linux, you should be more than capable of locating one of the many programs that add this functionality to windows.

Sysinternals (now a part of MS) has a program called Desktops that's better than the powertoy. I use that when I'm stuck using Windows.

IMHO, it's still a joke compared to the virtual desktops support in Gnome/KDE.

However if you edit the download web page source you will find an embedded JavaScript link: http://wb.dlservice.microsoft.com/download/.... copy and paste that and you'll get another web page telling you:

" If you have not already installed ActiveX control or the JavaTM applet, an information box will appear in your Microsoft Internet Explorer browser prompting you to install "ActiveX control:... If the Download Manager can not install the ActiveX control or the JavaTM applet in your browser, you may have system restrictions. If you have system restrictions, please: * Download products using the Web Browser method * Contact your organizationâ(TM)s Administrator to download products using the Download Manager method"

Blah Blah Blah. Look, Microsoft. This is easy. You give us a link, and we download it. Why do you have to drown something AS SIMPLE AS DOWNLOADING A FILE UNDER TONNES OF YOUR INSECURE ACTIVEX RUBBISH or even Java? You've got a separate ProductID you assign people, so what is your problem here (beyond your own myopic bureaucratic stupidity?)

Well okay Microsoft. I can't be bothered wading through your hopeless web programmers inane crap, so I'll wait for the torrent to appear and use my ProductID with that.

PS. I tried Vista for two months, thought it was total crap deleted it and reinstalled XP. I gave you another chance but you're really trying my patience. Please fire everyone who worked on Vista (especially your marketing) and your goober web programmers. They are really getting on my nerves.

Direct download links:

32-bit
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULFRE_EN_DVD.ISO

64-bit
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULXFRE_EN_DVD.ISO

Direct download links:

32-bit
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULFRE_EN_DVD.ISO

64-bit
http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/3/3/633118BD-6C3D-45A4-B985-F0FDFFE1B021/EN/7000.0.081212-1400_client_en-us_Ultimate-GB1CULXFRE_EN_DVD.ISO

Well, I dont know about you, but I have been using multiple virtual desktops since 2kpro. Heck, MS even put them in the xp power toys package. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/Downloads/powertoys/Xppowertoys.mspx I'm sorry, but as someone who mentions Linux, you should be more than capable of locating one of the many programs that add this functionality to windows.

fast user switching (and/or whatever MS calls their equivalent function)

I'm pretty sure Microsoft coined the term "fast user switching."

I have 2 Palms lying around - had them for years. I never bought a single app for them. I've had an iPhone for 4 weeks - and I've already bought 2 apps for it.

As I tell the people that have an ipod and an iphone when they ask me if their new computer should be a mac - 'Of course, you've already made the decision'. That's when they ask if they can have Word... sigh.

Yes?

I'm using a T22 to type on now. I use it as a (semi)thin client to NX into my desktop.

I learned to touch type on this thing and I adore the keyboard. One of the reasons that I like it so much.
I find the nipple easy to use too. Once I got to grips with it I preferred it over the track pads on my other laptops.
Saying that, I use an upside down mouse on my desktop so ordinary rodents aren't exactly my preference.

SP4 handles drives bigger than 128GiB. In SP2 or later, you can patch the registry for the same effect:

EnableBigLBA.

Set HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\atapi\Parameters\EnableBigLba to 1 (it should be a DWORD).

Unfortunately, it's been about 8 or 9 years since I've done any device work on Windows.

But see the CreateFile call, it describes how to open both physical and logical devices.

I don't know... from what I read, Windows 2008 adoption is "unusually" high...

http://4sysops.com/archives/windows-server-2008-adoption-is-better-than-vistas/

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2007/jun07/06-05WinServer08.mspx

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39359154,00.htm

I don't know if you can draw a correlation from that though. ;)

You can easily tell the difference between 100fps and 10000fps by looking at high contrast fast motion. Human eyes don't see in frames, but the point where increasing framerate won't cause any perceptible difference is probably in the thousands of fps.

Here's a good explanation of the issues of motion reproduction:
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/archive/TempRate.mspx

Whatever temporal sampling rate you choose, it's unlikely to be fast enough
There is no practical frame rate high enough to properly portray all the motion typically encountered. It is necessary to pick a sensible rate that is slow enough to allow the video signal to be stored, routed around, and of course broadcast.

Microsoft will offer Mainstream Support for either a minimum of 5 years from the date of a productâ(TM)s general availability, or for 2 years after the successor product (N+1) is released, whichever is longer.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifepolicy

Windows 2k went GA 3/31/2000, and XP went GA 12/31/2001, which means 2k went out of support on 3/31/2005. It's not really Apple's fault that they dropped support for an OS that Microsoft stopped supporting over 3 years ago.

Microsoft will offer Mainstream Support for either a minimum of 5 years from the date of a productâ(TM)s general availability, or for 2 years after the successor product (N+1) is released, whichever is longer.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifepolicy

Windows 2k went GA 3/31/2000, and XP went GA 12/31/2001, which means 2k went out of support on 3/31/2005. It's not really Apple's fault that they dropped support for an OS that Microsoft stopped supporting over 3 years ago.

Microsoft employment stats, by category

Revenue and Headcount

Why not use asctime() and rely on it's more proven calculations of leap year and the like via the OS libraries?
Because the Windows CE C runtime is woefully under-featured and it's support of Win32 time functions is very limited.

Why not use asctime() and rely on it's more proven calculations of leap year and the like via the OS libraries?
Because the Windows CE C runtime is woefully under-featured and it's support of Win32 time functions is very limited.

For apps that can handle addresses above 2 GB, 64 bit Vista (and XP) already does exactly that:

Memory and Address Space Limits

Umm, you do realize that Microsoft only supports 4 gigs of RAM, even with PAE, for most 32 bit Windows versions? The only 32 bit MS OSes that support more than 4 gigs of RAM are the Windows Server Enterprise and Datacenter editions(which are pretty much irrelevant to the home user). http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx

I don't have first hand experience or anything I can refer to, but some people stated running Windows 7 beta on machines that just barely met Windows XP's requirements... 400 mhz machines with very little RAM, and it ran relatively ok (well, when compared to XP), so a higher end 32 bit CPU, let say a P4, would run fine.

Also, XP 64 can handle 128 gigs. The only version of Windows 64 bit that is stuck at 8 gigs is Windows Vista Home Basic.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx

So, you're saying that when Win7 nags you and clicking the nag opens up http://www.microsoft.com/windows/antivirus-partners/windows-7.aspx, they're pointing you to uncertified software? BTW - I just went to his system and did the install again and didn't get any warning about installing uncertified software, so I'm guessing it's signed.

Are you guys actively testing Win7, or just ragging on people that don't report the bestus experience ever?

Meh. My karma is excellent, therefore I post with a score of 2. What can I say? You post as an AC, you post with a score of 0.

Interesting though. So they finally have sorted it out in Vista and Windows Server 2008. How many years has this taken now? And what about deployments of Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP? Is there a hotfix planned for these operating systems?

For people that actually need to load unsigned 64-bit drivers (myself, for instance, to patch tcpip.sys so I can have lots of half-open connections at once), the procedure is actually pretty simple. You generate a cert, sign the driver yourself and then put the computer into "testing mode", which allows for self-signed drivers. The whole process can be automated (for instance, the tcpip.sys patch is now one click plus reboot) so that it's transparent to the end user.

IMO, this is the correct way to do it -- you can sign the driver yourself but you have to explicitly tell Windows to accept that signature. Seems like a perfectly reasonable balance between protecting newbies and not aggravating power-users too much.

References
http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/c/5/9c5b2167-8017-4bae-9fde-d599bac8184a/kmsigning.doc (DOC WARNING)>
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33920573

http://support.microsoft.com/contactus/cu_sc_more_master?ws=support#tab1

They are not, however, primary support for the vast majority of installations.

http://support.microsoft.com/contactus/cu_sc_more_master?ws=support#tab1

They are not, however, primary support for the vast majority of installations.

The result:

• Usage of this CA will be compulsory for securing interacting with the government
• Usage of this CA will be compulsory for securing interacting with all banks of the country
• Actually, this CA is not really a government entity, but a for-profit company that likes to make you pay through the nose
• This government-sponsored monopoly likes to prop up other monopolies or create other monopolies
• You'll be paying through the nose for gizmos such as signing sticks that don't actually work as expected.
• If you try to fuck with them, you'll be left with ugly stains on the backseat of your car

Here are two honest questions:

1. Why did Microsoft make the equation editor in Word 2007 incompatible with that in Word 2003? (And yes, I know that they shipped the old equation as part of powerpoint 2007 and you could discover this with enough effort. But in my setting a few people upgraded and everyone else had to upgrade to be able to edit the new documents. No, the docx update for 2003 did not permit editing of the new equation format.)

2. Why did Microsoft ship Excel 2007 in such a form that it couldn't read old macros (circa Excel 95). In fact they have a simple fix for this, but it's not available unless you contact MS tech support.

I can see two reasons for these omission: 1) stunning incompetence or 2) a deliberate attempt to drive upgrades. I have a hard time believing it's not #2, but I have no evidence.

Just because it's FUD doesn't mean the F, U, and D are not justified.

You forgot the third: Improve de product, detaching old-fashioned-bad-designed features.

I'd recommend giving Server 2008 a try. You can download it free from Microsoft: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=B6E99D4C-A40E-4FD2-A0F7-32212B520F50&WT.sp=_technet_,dcsjwb9vb00000c932fd0rjc7_5p3t&displaylang=en

It's basically Vista but highly compartmentalised. Everything but the basic OS and IE is an optional install, even things like audio or wifi support. As such, it's very fast and much lighter on RAM than Vista, but you can use all the Vista compatible drivers and such with it.

Best of all, you can run it for up to 8 months without a product key. It's basically a free copy of "Vista Without the Crap Edition" if you don't mind re-installing every 240 days.

Here are two honest questions:

1. Why did Microsoft make the equation editor in Word 2007 incompatible with that in Word 2003? (And yes, I know that they shipped the old equation as part of powerpoint 2007 and you could discover this with enough effort. But in my setting a few people upgraded and everyone else had to upgrade to be able to edit the new documents. No, the docx update for 2003 did not permit editing of the new equation format.)

2. Why did Microsoft ship Excel 2007 in such a form that it couldn't read old macros (circa Excel 95). In fact they have a simple fix for this, but it's not available unless you contact MS tech support.

I can see two reasons for these omission: 1) stunning incompetence or 2) a deliberate attempt to drive upgrades. I have a hard time believing it's not #2, but I have no evidence.

Just because it's FUD doesn't mean the F, U, and D are not justified.

I had a similar experience with Vista; Vista was blue screening trying to load "CI.DLL." After trying all of the sundry ways of restoring my Vista installation, a cursory search revealed that this was a common death knell.

Instead of chancing that this would happen again, I just installed Ubuntu+VMWare+WGA Patched Windows XP.

I also had a WGA problem this summer when some malware tried to patch tcpip.sys. That was a complete nightmare. It turns out that if a single file's cryptographic hash doesn't match whatever is in their hash set WGA deactivates Visa. While I appreciate knowing about the malware, I don't appreciate not being able to load more than four programs, not being able to tell me exactly what it was that caused my copy of Vista to become deactivated and not being of any help at resolving the problem.

The most depressing place on the internet must be the WGA Vista support forum. Within a few minutes of browsing, you can find stories from average users whom cannot run their small businesses, whom have all of their data held hostage and whom are in tears. I can understand Ubuntu users relying on web forums to get support; however, I cannot understand Vista users having to rely on web forums for support because their software assumes they're criminals.

And, if you have "search for help on the Internet" turned off like most paranoid Slashdotters, you can visit the link directly at http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/help/HA100479751033.aspx.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/helpandsupport/learnmore/crawford_september03.mspx

No More Dog Days

There are, indeed, strong feelings on both sides about the dog. Rover is the default animated character that appears when you open the Search Companion. People love it or loathe it. There seems to be very little middle ground. Fortunately, everyone can be made happy.

You didn't read that page, did you?

Maybe you can share your stash with the rest of us? Over 2 gigabytes for an old ass RPG? I don't think you're reading the right numbers. Maybe you were using over 2 gigs in total with WOW, Firefox, and everything else you've got loaded up at the time. But 2 gigs for one game? No, not buying it. Show us a screen shot form Process Explorer, otherwise this is just troll fodder.

15 FPS you say? Sure, that's possible. I can get the same thing in Source Engine games when I enable HDR and 4x AA at 1440x900. Can you really be sure you were using the same settings on your Linux box? Could you even enable Anti-aliasing, or even know what it is? Are you using the original drivers that shipped with your card?

Your story just isn't credible, but it's sure is a nice bash on the gaming performance of Microsoft operating systems. Bravo.

The sad truth is that MS is doing better than ever - they've more or less successfully diversified and have multiple profit centres.

That's somewhat true. Here are some operating income figures from their 2008 annual report -- it's 6 months out of date, but represents the most recent full year of data:

• $13 billion from Client (Desktop Windows)
• $12 billion from Business (Office)
• $4.5 billion from Server
• $0.4 billion from Entertainment (Xbox/Zune/PC games)
• -$1.2 billion from Online Services

My take on it is that they aren't diversified enough -- everything hinges on desktop Windows and Office right now. There's some strength in the Server division, but that's also where they have some very powerful competitors. If I were an investor, I would pay close attention to corporate spending in 2009, since some companies may start exploring cheaper alternatives.

The Entertainment division is definitely a weak point, especially when you consider that the Xbox is approaching its peak profitability. Even if they were making ten times as much, I would still be wary of depending on the Xbox's revenues, since the market leader can flip-flop between console generations.

You also forgot to mention Microsoft mice and keyboards.

It's related to an ANSI standard, according to MS documentation.

According to the font of dubious knowledge, 1601 is (in the Gregorian calendar) a common year starting on a Monday. It's also the most recent first year of a century prior to 2001 that meets that criteria.

I suspect someone picked that date for that reason, and/or because it was back far enough in time to allow the date/time of most most historical data and business records to be represented.

Microsoft is building a $300 million dollar research campus in Baking's university district.

China's "Silicon Valley."

100,000 square meters of floor space.

5,000 scientists and engineers. Microsoft Breaks Ground on New R&D Campus

Microsoft is a multinational with employees, facilities, and investments across the globe. To understand its impact you need to look beyond the comic-book economics of Scrooge McDuck and the Money Bin.

Uhmm, the kicker is, I'm *STILL* running Win2k. And not only that, but I've got drivers from within the last year running on it for both my PCIe Radeon HD3650, and my Logitech Driving Force Pro. Nevermind that Realtek supports most of their chipset hardware all the way back to either Win9x or DOS, depending.

And the kicker of all this? Basically any game that doesn't require Windows Live and/or have a hardcoded check for XP will run and play fine on it.

WinXP for all intents and purposes was a rebadge of 2k with some additional eyecandy and a FEW interface changes. But the majority of said interface changes don't affect 90 percent of the applications out there.

Forced obsolescence is fine if there's a reason, but if your 10 year old OS has everything that a modern app needs to support it, there's no reason to upgrade. (Nevermind that 2k is the last windows version without that annoying Windows Activation stuff, and in fact is the reason I spent 300 bucks on it well after WinXP was out.)

Keep telling yourself that. But there are actually a lot of enhancements . And no, those are not UI enhancements(which there are a ton, like wireless stuff in xp sp2). Those are just kernel enhancements.

I prefer a simple, wide and long

That's what she said

I'm betting that a good amount of the information used in this case came from posters on the WGA forum, where people can post if they're having issues with WGA. One of the tools available in that forum is a WGA diagnostic tool which will generate a sanitized text dump of a user's windows validation information. Most cases on that forum are people whose brother, cousin, or sketchy PC shop installed a common warez release of Windows on their systems, but several there are people who bought apparently legitimate software from resellers which failed validation and later turned out to be counterfeit. Microsoft got in touch with these users, identified the resellers, and I'm betting that this news story is the result.

I'm betting that a good amount of the information used in this case came from posters on the WGA forum, where people can post if they're having issues with WGA. One of the tools available in that forum is a WGA diagnostic tool which will generate a sanitized text dump of a user's windows validation information. Most cases on that forum are people whose brother, cousin, or sketchy PC shop installed a common warez release of Windows on their systems, but several there are people who bought apparently legitimate software from resellers which failed validation and later turned out to be counterfeit. Microsoft got in touch with these users, identified the resellers, and I'm betting that this news story is the result.

Here's some fun trivia: Contrary to popular belief, Windows only rode on top of DOS through version 3.11. 95 and 98 only looked like they did, by optionally loading 16-bit legacy DOS drivers as part of the Windows startup process, and by providing both DOS VMs and an option to boot into DOS Mode (which actually was MS-DOS) for backwards compatibility with legacy DOS apps.

This page has a pretty good overview of Windows 95 architecture, with some diagrams that show the various OS components, none of which is a full copy of DOS that has a GUI riding on top of it as found in Windows 3.11 and earlier. Instead, there is a 32-bit kernel which uses 32-bit device drivers exclusively, unless the user installs a legacy DOS driver.

If any DOS apps are run within Windows 95, they run in their own DOS virtual machine, and if no DOS apps are running, no DOS VM is created. These VMs are similar to those in Windows NT; what is not similar to Windows NT is the ability to load DOS device drivers to support legacy hardware that had no 32-bit protected-mode driver.

Those DOS drivers almost always ran slower than 32-bit drivers and frequently caused problems, to the extent that one of the first steps in troubleshooting a Windows 95 system was to check the autoexec.bat and config.sys for unneeded DOS drivers, or simply renaming those files to get rid of the gunk.

If there really were a copy of DOS running underneath Windows 95, renaming autoexec.bat and config.sys would have removed all the device drivers, leaving you with no access to your CD-ROM drive due to a lack of MSCDEX.EXE, which is needed by all versions of DOS, including the "DOS Mode" of Windows 95.

To run the MSRT program you need to run mrt.exe. from the "run" dialog box or a command prompt in Windows.

You can directly download the latest mrt.exe

I disagree in that I like the precision of my mouse. I've used pointing sticks before, and I prefer a trackpad if I'm going mouse-less. However, if I've got the room for it I'll take a mouse every time.

The biggest problem with articles like this is that there's a very wide range of tastes when it comes to input devices. I prefer a simple, wide and long mouse for my uses. If given the choice between the linked mouse and a wireless, decked out, beautiful logitech laser mouse that costs hundreds of dollars, I'd take the simple one every time.

Best keyboard of all time is the old version of the G15 from Logitech, which has functionally been replaced with the new G11. You don't get the display but I barely used it anyway. I love all the macro keys on the left side for World of Warcraft, which make a really nice comp for pvp and pve in that you can easily combine them with the CTRL button, the CTRL SHIFT or SHIFT (which is a little more awkward than the ctrl and ctrl shift for some reason).

As for mice, I have to say that my Sidewinder from Microsoft represents some irony in the fact that it works nicely and does not impede me in any way.

So how might you blacklist a cert you've never seen? Only victims see it. And if you see it, you're already a victim. Add to this that any number of bogo-signing certs can be made, sitting in reserve, ready to pull out whenever one fails. No, the only confusion here is yours.

Best defense: "How to Remove a Root Certificate from the Trusted Root Store". Remove the RapidSSL cert, and any others that you have reason to mistrust.

Secondarily, hope no crap falls on you when someone you know gets hit.

Possibly my favorite things that Microsoft has ever produced are their new User Interface Guidelines, especially the Warning Messages page:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa511263.aspx

This page also provides a good summary of the other Interface Guidelines:
http://www.istartedsomething.com/20070301/updated-vista-ux-guide/

Microsoft's programmers aren't innocent, but I think quite a few of the inane warning messages are from third-party software vendors.

Most nerds seem to turn it off assuming it is "flasy useless eye candy". Little do they know they basically turned off hardware accelleration. You do know that Vista, with Aero enabled, will delegate most of the window drawing to the video card. In fact, the more ram on your video card, the better, Vista stores all the window data on that instead of your system RAM.

In Vista there are actually multiple copies of the "window data" in BOTH system and Video ram. That's one reason why dwm.exe commit size is so large in Vista.

If you have a WDDM 1.1 compatible video card in Windows 7, however, the memory savings is huge. Especially if you frequently have a lot of windows open simultaneously. All this was presented at WinHEC/PDC. All of this means that you can actually run Win7 with 1GB quite well without any disk thrashing. You can certainly run WinXP with 1GB or less, but you don't get all the cool stuff that all kids love.

So how do you know if your current Video card is WDDM 1.1 compatible? From looking at the INF files distributed with the BETA, you can deduce that any DirectX 10 capable card is also WDDM 1.1. Presumably the graphics guidelines for Windows 7 system builders will be published soon to verify this. Until then, get your latest WDDM 1.1 drivers from Windows Update Catalog

Most nerds seem to turn it off assuming it is "flasy useless eye candy". Little do they know they basically turned off hardware accelleration. You do know that Vista, with Aero enabled, will delegate most of the window drawing to the video card. In fact, the more ram on your video card, the better, Vista stores all the window data on that instead of your system RAM.

In Vista there are actually multiple copies of the "window data" in BOTH system and Video ram. That's one reason why dwm.exe commit size is so large in Vista.

If you have a WDDM 1.1 compatible video card in Windows 7, however, the memory savings is huge. Especially if you frequently have a lot of windows open simultaneously. All this was presented at WinHEC/PDC. All of this means that you can actually run Win7 with 1GB quite well without any disk thrashing. You can certainly run WinXP with 1GB or less, but you don't get all the cool stuff that all kids love.

So how do you know if your current Video card is WDDM 1.1 compatible? From looking at the INF files distributed with the BETA, you can deduce that any DirectX 10 capable card is also WDDM 1.1. Presumably the graphics guidelines for Windows 7 system builders will be published soon to verify this. Until then, get your latest WDDM 1.1 drivers from Windows Update Catalog

All new ergonomic keyboards from MS do not have "Insert" key. But thankfully they still sell old models.

That's not actually accurate (unless you mean "not all do have"). Two of the five ergonomic keyboards that appear in their catalogue have the standard 3x2 layout with "Insert", as does this other one that's listed separately. Another has a 2x3 layout, though it's not possible to make out whether "Insert" is there. The remaining two have the bigger "Del" key that you describe.

Seems to me that in the last year or so Microsoft has done a bit of a swing away from messing around with novel layouts for those keys.