Slashdot Mirror

Sorry, I havent mentally translated to Vista apps yet, and they changed the names everywhere (to the better, but the change is a pain).

I dont have a vista box or vm in front of me at the moment, but what was 'All Users' is now 'Public'.

So on Vista, its now this:

%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Roaming
and
%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Local

On vista, %ALLUSERSPROFILE% should resolve to C:\Users\Public\ by default, but this can be changed by group policy, so be careful.

These distinguish between data that should roam (when users are using roaming profiles) and that which is local to that machine (temp data, caches, stuff that doesnt need to follow on a roaming profile).

Go to a command prompt, and type:

C:\>echo %allusersprofile%

to see what the default is.

Now you have to be careful with paths. What seems simple isnt really that simple. Because you have to deal with roaming profiles and non-roaming profiles (ie, the roaming vs. local above). You have to deal with the case where Redirected MyDocuments is in effect. You have to deal with group policy which can change the default locations of all these things.

The 'correct' way to do it, so that all these things are handled behind the scenes, is to use the 'Known Folders' API in Vista.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

Mind you, this is not the simplest stuff out there, and is really targeted with those more familiar with the C windows API. But there are COM interfaces, which can be consumed by traditional VB6-type of apps, or .NET apps through COM interop (IIRC). If your app is in C/C++ and you're used to consuming win32 api's in shell then this should be easy stuff for you.

There is a ton of documentation out there from MS, but unfortunately, its not as well organized as it should be. And its gotten worse over the years as the underlying systems get more complicated, and facilities/abstractions are created to deal with different versions.

Here's some links, hopefully this doesnt scare you off. The goal should be that your app can and does pass the 'Certified for Windows Vista' (or the XP equiv if you're targeting XP only for now). This is for more than just marketing bling, this means that your apps will deal with all the things that people complain about on Vista, like UAC, etc. Basically the software logo program (the 'certified for vista' and 'works with vista') is a set of best practices for the desktop app developer. Like the WHQL is for drivers and hardware.

(WARN: some of this stuff is hidden behind the MS partner program logins. The good news is that you can become a registered partner for about 30 minutes of your time filling out information, and no cost. There are bennies too. You can use the Microsoft Empower ISV program, to get 5 MSDN Universal-equivalent licenses for ~$400 for the first two years. Then you can translate to the Action Pack subscription. Makes getting all your MS infrastructure very cheap and easy for the small ISV.)

App Compat Forums for Vista
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowForum.aspx?ForumID=904&SiteID=1

Windows Vista Developer Story (odd name, but top level for lots of info)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa904951.aspx

Vista/Server2008 App Compat Cookbook
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480152.aspx

Developing Quality Applications with Known Folders
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

http://microsoft.mrmpslc.com/Inno

Sorry, I havent mentally translated to Vista apps yet, and they changed the names everywhere (to the better, but the change is a pain).

I dont have a vista box or vm in front of me at the moment, but what was 'All Users' is now 'Public'.

So on Vista, its now this:

%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Roaming
and
%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Local

On vista, %ALLUSERSPROFILE% should resolve to C:\Users\Public\ by default, but this can be changed by group policy, so be careful.

These distinguish between data that should roam (when users are using roaming profiles) and that which is local to that machine (temp data, caches, stuff that doesnt need to follow on a roaming profile).

Go to a command prompt, and type:

C:\>echo %allusersprofile%

to see what the default is.

Now you have to be careful with paths. What seems simple isnt really that simple. Because you have to deal with roaming profiles and non-roaming profiles (ie, the roaming vs. local above). You have to deal with the case where Redirected MyDocuments is in effect. You have to deal with group policy which can change the default locations of all these things.

The 'correct' way to do it, so that all these things are handled behind the scenes, is to use the 'Known Folders' API in Vista.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

Mind you, this is not the simplest stuff out there, and is really targeted with those more familiar with the C windows API. But there are COM interfaces, which can be consumed by traditional VB6-type of apps, or .NET apps through COM interop (IIRC). If your app is in C/C++ and you're used to consuming win32 api's in shell then this should be easy stuff for you.

There is a ton of documentation out there from MS, but unfortunately, its not as well organized as it should be. And its gotten worse over the years as the underlying systems get more complicated, and facilities/abstractions are created to deal with different versions.

Here's some links, hopefully this doesnt scare you off. The goal should be that your app can and does pass the 'Certified for Windows Vista' (or the XP equiv if you're targeting XP only for now). This is for more than just marketing bling, this means that your apps will deal with all the things that people complain about on Vista, like UAC, etc. Basically the software logo program (the 'certified for vista' and 'works with vista') is a set of best practices for the desktop app developer. Like the WHQL is for drivers and hardware.

(WARN: some of this stuff is hidden behind the MS partner program logins. The good news is that you can become a registered partner for about 30 minutes of your time filling out information, and no cost. There are bennies too. You can use the Microsoft Empower ISV program, to get 5 MSDN Universal-equivalent licenses for ~$400 for the first two years. Then you can translate to the Action Pack subscription. Makes getting all your MS infrastructure very cheap and easy for the small ISV.)

App Compat Forums for Vista
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowForum.aspx?ForumID=904&SiteID=1

Windows Vista Developer Story (odd name, but top level for lots of info)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa904951.aspx

Vista/Server2008 App Compat Cookbook
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480152.aspx

Developing Quality Applications with Known Folders
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

http://microsoft.mrmpslc.com/Inno

Sorry, I havent mentally translated to Vista apps yet, and they changed the names everywhere (to the better, but the change is a pain).

I dont have a vista box or vm in front of me at the moment, but what was 'All Users' is now 'Public'.

So on Vista, its now this:

%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Roaming
and
%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Local

On vista, %ALLUSERSPROFILE% should resolve to C:\Users\Public\ by default, but this can be changed by group policy, so be careful.

These distinguish between data that should roam (when users are using roaming profiles) and that which is local to that machine (temp data, caches, stuff that doesnt need to follow on a roaming profile).

Go to a command prompt, and type:

C:\>echo %allusersprofile%

to see what the default is.

Now you have to be careful with paths. What seems simple isnt really that simple. Because you have to deal with roaming profiles and non-roaming profiles (ie, the roaming vs. local above). You have to deal with the case where Redirected MyDocuments is in effect. You have to deal with group policy which can change the default locations of all these things.

The 'correct' way to do it, so that all these things are handled behind the scenes, is to use the 'Known Folders' API in Vista.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

Mind you, this is not the simplest stuff out there, and is really targeted with those more familiar with the C windows API. But there are COM interfaces, which can be consumed by traditional VB6-type of apps, or .NET apps through COM interop (IIRC). If your app is in C/C++ and you're used to consuming win32 api's in shell then this should be easy stuff for you.

There is a ton of documentation out there from MS, but unfortunately, its not as well organized as it should be. And its gotten worse over the years as the underlying systems get more complicated, and facilities/abstractions are created to deal with different versions.

Here's some links, hopefully this doesnt scare you off. The goal should be that your app can and does pass the 'Certified for Windows Vista' (or the XP equiv if you're targeting XP only for now). This is for more than just marketing bling, this means that your apps will deal with all the things that people complain about on Vista, like UAC, etc. Basically the software logo program (the 'certified for vista' and 'works with vista') is a set of best practices for the desktop app developer. Like the WHQL is for drivers and hardware.

(WARN: some of this stuff is hidden behind the MS partner program logins. The good news is that you can become a registered partner for about 30 minutes of your time filling out information, and no cost. There are bennies too. You can use the Microsoft Empower ISV program, to get 5 MSDN Universal-equivalent licenses for ~$400 for the first two years. Then you can translate to the Action Pack subscription. Makes getting all your MS infrastructure very cheap and easy for the small ISV.)

App Compat Forums for Vista
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowForum.aspx?ForumID=904&SiteID=1

Windows Vista Developer Story (odd name, but top level for lots of info)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa904951.aspx

Vista/Server2008 App Compat Cookbook
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480152.aspx

Developing Quality Applications with Known Folders
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

http://microsoft.mrmpslc.com/Inno

Sorry, I havent mentally translated to Vista apps yet, and they changed the names everywhere (to the better, but the change is a pain).

I dont have a vista box or vm in front of me at the moment, but what was 'All Users' is now 'Public'.

So on Vista, its now this:

%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Roaming
and
%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Local

On vista, %ALLUSERSPROFILE% should resolve to C:\Users\Public\ by default, but this can be changed by group policy, so be careful.

These distinguish between data that should roam (when users are using roaming profiles) and that which is local to that machine (temp data, caches, stuff that doesnt need to follow on a roaming profile).

Go to a command prompt, and type:

C:\>echo %allusersprofile%

to see what the default is.

Now you have to be careful with paths. What seems simple isnt really that simple. Because you have to deal with roaming profiles and non-roaming profiles (ie, the roaming vs. local above). You have to deal with the case where Redirected MyDocuments is in effect. You have to deal with group policy which can change the default locations of all these things.

The 'correct' way to do it, so that all these things are handled behind the scenes, is to use the 'Known Folders' API in Vista.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

Mind you, this is not the simplest stuff out there, and is really targeted with those more familiar with the C windows API. But there are COM interfaces, which can be consumed by traditional VB6-type of apps, or .NET apps through COM interop (IIRC). If your app is in C/C++ and you're used to consuming win32 api's in shell then this should be easy stuff for you.

There is a ton of documentation out there from MS, but unfortunately, its not as well organized as it should be. And its gotten worse over the years as the underlying systems get more complicated, and facilities/abstractions are created to deal with different versions.

Here's some links, hopefully this doesnt scare you off. The goal should be that your app can and does pass the 'Certified for Windows Vista' (or the XP equiv if you're targeting XP only for now). This is for more than just marketing bling, this means that your apps will deal with all the things that people complain about on Vista, like UAC, etc. Basically the software logo program (the 'certified for vista' and 'works with vista') is a set of best practices for the desktop app developer. Like the WHQL is for drivers and hardware.

(WARN: some of this stuff is hidden behind the MS partner program logins. The good news is that you can become a registered partner for about 30 minutes of your time filling out information, and no cost. There are bennies too. You can use the Microsoft Empower ISV program, to get 5 MSDN Universal-equivalent licenses for ~$400 for the first two years. Then you can translate to the Action Pack subscription. Makes getting all your MS infrastructure very cheap and easy for the small ISV.)

App Compat Forums for Vista
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowForum.aspx?ForumID=904&SiteID=1

Windows Vista Developer Story (odd name, but top level for lots of info)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa904951.aspx

Vista/Server2008 App Compat Cookbook
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480152.aspx

Developing Quality Applications with Known Folders
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

http://microsoft.mrmpslc.com/Inno

Sorry, I havent mentally translated to Vista apps yet, and they changed the names everywhere (to the better, but the change is a pain).

I dont have a vista box or vm in front of me at the moment, but what was 'All Users' is now 'Public'.

So on Vista, its now this:

%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Roaming
and
%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Applications Data\Local

On vista, %ALLUSERSPROFILE% should resolve to C:\Users\Public\ by default, but this can be changed by group policy, so be careful.

These distinguish between data that should roam (when users are using roaming profiles) and that which is local to that machine (temp data, caches, stuff that doesnt need to follow on a roaming profile).

Go to a command prompt, and type:

C:\>echo %allusersprofile%

to see what the default is.

Now you have to be careful with paths. What seems simple isnt really that simple. Because you have to deal with roaming profiles and non-roaming profiles (ie, the roaming vs. local above). You have to deal with the case where Redirected MyDocuments is in effect. You have to deal with group policy which can change the default locations of all these things.

The 'correct' way to do it, so that all these things are handled behind the scenes, is to use the 'Known Folders' API in Vista.

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

Mind you, this is not the simplest stuff out there, and is really targeted with those more familiar with the C windows API. But there are COM interfaces, which can be consumed by traditional VB6-type of apps, or .NET apps through COM interop (IIRC). If your app is in C/C++ and you're used to consuming win32 api's in shell then this should be easy stuff for you.

There is a ton of documentation out there from MS, but unfortunately, its not as well organized as it should be. And its gotten worse over the years as the underlying systems get more complicated, and facilities/abstractions are created to deal with different versions.

Here's some links, hopefully this doesnt scare you off. The goal should be that your app can and does pass the 'Certified for Windows Vista' (or the XP equiv if you're targeting XP only for now). This is for more than just marketing bling, this means that your apps will deal with all the things that people complain about on Vista, like UAC, etc. Basically the software logo program (the 'certified for vista' and 'works with vista') is a set of best practices for the desktop app developer. Like the WHQL is for drivers and hardware.

(WARN: some of this stuff is hidden behind the MS partner program logins. The good news is that you can become a registered partner for about 30 minutes of your time filling out information, and no cost. There are bennies too. You can use the Microsoft Empower ISV program, to get 5 MSDN Universal-equivalent licenses for ~$400 for the first two years. Then you can translate to the Action Pack subscription. Makes getting all your MS infrastructure very cheap and easy for the small ISV.)

App Compat Forums for Vista
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowForum.aspx?ForumID=904&SiteID=1

Windows Vista Developer Story (odd name, but top level for lots of info)
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa904951.aspx

Vista/Server2008 App Compat Cookbook
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480152.aspx

Developing Quality Applications with Known Folders
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb756896.aspx

http://microsoft.mrmpslc.com/Inno

Law #1: If a bad guy can persuade you to run his program on your computer, it's not your computer anymore
[...]
When you choose to run a program, you are making a decision to turn over control of your computer to it. Once a program is running, it can do anything, up to the limits of what you yourself can do on the computer.

But if you compare it to Windows, it looks very open, and open source friendly.

Sorry, but as long as OSX refuses to install on anything but Apple hardware it doesn't look open to me at all. I fail to see why it should matter whether or not it's partly derived from an open source distribution.

Every app in OS X can create PDF files, for free.

And so would Office 2007 had Adobe not threatened to take legal action.

I don't see Microsoft giving away Visual Studio

You probably haven't been looking?

I never have experienced any "outages" of Office installed on my desktop...

Then you haven't tried visio.

Just read the articles and it doesn't bear much similarity to the summary Taco posted. There is a M$ press release that describes a off-site document hosting set up. As long as you have Office installed on a machine you can download/edit/review documents from the server anywhere in the world. Not really comparable to Googles offerings.

Actually, since everything seems to be interacting desktop-to-web-and-back, my guess is that the errors could actually be caught at some point in the process (though it seems unlikely).

By the way, here is the actual Microsoft press release, indicating clearly which components will be involved (for business and personal levels).

there really isn't such a thing as a demo of Windows you can install to see how your hardware runs it

Yes there is, sort of. You can currently order (on CD) or download a trial edition of Windows XP Professional 64bit from http://www.microsoft.com/products/info/product.aspx?view=22&pcid=2abf99cd-a5e4-469c-802e-55ca8ec542d5&type=trl&crumb=catpage&catid=ea710cad-37b0-4975-bcd6-abfee19961df#ProductDetails.

As for Vista, there doesn't appear to be a "full" version available at the moment, but there's a virtual install available from http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=c2c27337-d4d1-4b9b-926d-86493c7da1aa&displaylang=en&tm

I dare say that there will be a real, installable version available in the fullness of time; I had one a few years back for XP Pro (32bit).

there really isn't such a thing as a demo of Windows you can install to see how your hardware runs it

Yes there is, sort of. You can currently order (on CD) or download a trial edition of Windows XP Professional 64bit from http://www.microsoft.com/products/info/product.aspx?view=22&pcid=2abf99cd-a5e4-469c-802e-55ca8ec542d5&type=trl&crumb=catpage&catid=ea710cad-37b0-4975-bcd6-abfee19961df#ProductDetails.

As for Vista, there doesn't appear to be a "full" version available at the moment, but there's a virtual install available from http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=c2c27337-d4d1-4b9b-926d-86493c7da1aa&displaylang=en&tm

I dare say that there will be a real, installable version available in the fullness of time; I had one a few years back for XP Pro (32bit).

The widget size is balanced with the text size on the classic theme, yet with the
I'm 28 and don't have a problem with the default DPI settings, using a 18" 1280x1024 panel primarily until the new machines arrive. I also use a 1920x1200 15" laptop and have no problems with that either (admittedly it is easier on my own 1920x1200 17" laptop).

The cleartype thing is fair enough - Cleartype assumes a certain pixel colour order and exploits it to provide hints, but unfortunately Microsoft do not provide (by default) a tool to tune this. On some monitors Cleartype makes text, especially at smaller sizes, almost illegible. You need to install the powertoy or visit http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/tuner/Step1.aspx in order to set it up properly.

On my 13" Macbook (Black 2.16GHz, not pro) the defaults were unusable, but they are fine on my Dell Inspiron 9300 17".

Absolutely true. I bought a pre boxed NAS. It runs Linux in firmware. Vista can't log into it but everything else can. I found the solution here.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb727037.aspx

The important paragraph is near the bottom.
"Cannot Authenticate to a Shared Folder from a Windows Vista-based Computer
If you cannot authenticate when accessing a shared folder from a Windows Vista-based computer on a computer running a version of Windows prior to Windows XP (such as Windows 98 or Windows 95), a computer running an operating system other than Microsoft Windows, or to a network device, the cause might be a mismatch in the configured support for NTLM 2, an authentication protocol that is used for file and printer sharing connections. By default, Windows Vista is configured to use NTLM 2.

To resolve this issue, you can do one of the following:"

The basic gist is change everything else, even if you can't write code for your firmware.

If you can't, then change Vista but this is not recommended.
I fall into the catagory of running an operating system other than Windows. It is in firmware. Care to edit my firmware? Ditching my encrypted fileserver is not an option.

ps. I've released all my new software under GPLv3. Novell shouldn't be able to threaten people....

Read the programmers' promise that Novell signed. It leaves Linus vulnerable to litigation from Microsoft, while protecting their own developers to the extent their work is either inside a paid Novell product or their work on their own that never goes into any Linux distribution.
microsoft.com/in[...]nity.mspx

The worst thing about the deal of course is that it got cute with the GPL, which always stands against any patent restrictions of any kind. They knew that, so they ended up with a "patent peace" for end users, agreeing not to see each other's customers. Now, SCO was the innovator who first alleged that end users should be the ones you sue under the GPL. No one has ever done such a thing. Companies normally sue one another. Now Novell has agreed that end users are the ones that are vulnerable, another feather in the anti-GPL force's cap.

-- Pamela Jones

I understand that point. $4000 seems a little steep. And you can bet they didn't offer to send a link on how to do it for free to their customers.

I understand that point. $4000 seems a little steep. And you can bet they didn't offer to send a link on how to do it for free to their customers.

I understand that point. $4000 seems a little steep. And you can bet they didn't offer to send a link on how to do it for free to their customers.

... [Microsoft] charged $4000 for a time zone update for Windows 2000. A server OS. When you can do it for free if you know how. Debian should charge NZers $4000 Canadian (OUCH!), then they would be respected.

The hotfix is for an operating system which is 7 years old! Microsoft still releases free security updates for Win2k, but has a maintenance plan for non-security hotfixes. Unlike Debian, whose stable release in 2000 (Debian 2.2 or "potato", released 8 months after Windows 2k) receives no updates, security or otherwise, nor does the release after it (Debian 3.0 "woody"). Additionally, the bug for the 2005 stable release (Debian 3.1 Sarge) does not have a NZ DST fix yet. The article concerns freshly baked Debian 4.0 "etch" (released 2007) which is the only "stable" Debian which has this NZ DST fix. Apparently the price of free updates for Debian "stable" is an upgrade treadmill!

Of course you can fix the timezone data for Win2k and WinNT for free (try even finding guidance for manually DST tables on systems 7+ years old for Debian). Microsoft tells you how to do it here, so you don't have to go to the parent's random forum link with incomplete or inaccurate information. Microsoft's article is updated with the latest time zone changes, and contains guidance for deploying the updates across an enterprise. The $4000 fix is the prepackaged and supported version which you can simply put into your management server and push to all the machines. Of course, the DST update is free for OSes that were released in the last 5 years!

Connecting to wireless is as easy as clicking on the freaking ballon that says, networks are available, click to connect to one,

Granted, DHCP is easy. Most of my machines are Ubuntu. As such my router is set up for WEP not WPA. I know big security no-no. I don't have many neighbors so the number of drive by leaches is low. To discourage matters, the DHCP range is in a blocked range in the router. A DHCP lease gets you no internet.

How long will it take you to find how to set up a static IP address and DNS for the first time on a Vista machine? Click and point on an access point is the easy part. Finding where to put a static IP address is another. I have a printer. It's address is 192.168.1.101/lp1. How long will it take you for the first time to properly print a test page from Vista. Good luck. It is much easer in any older version of Windows, mac, or Linux.

The back-up of the My Documents folder is on a Linux based SMB share with a password username combo. How long will it take you to log-in and start the file transfer? (Don't pull a number out of air based on a guess. Hint, a registry edit is required to get a working login, but make the assumption you don't know that yet) My first Vista to NAS login took more than 3 hours. Much of it on Google. Vista by default is unable to login to a Windows Workgroup SMB share with a password.

Here is the typical problem;
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Vista+workgroup+login+failure&btnG=Google+Search

Here is Microsoft's solution;
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb727037.aspx

You need to read down to the bottom of the page for this gem hidden in the fine print.
If you cannot authenticate when accessing a shared folder from a Windows Vista-based computer on a computer running a version of Windows prior to Windows XP (such as Windows 98 or Windows 95), a computer running an operating system other than Microsoft Windows, or to a network device, the cause might be a mismatch in the configured support for NTLM 2, an authentication protocol that is used for file and printer sharing connections. By default, Windows Vista is configured to use NTLM 2.

To resolve this issue, you can do one of the following:

        *

            Enable NTLM 2 support on the computer or device to which the Windows Vista-based computer is attempting to connect. For computers running versions of Windows prior to Windows XP, see How to enable NTLM 2 authentication. For computers running operating systems other than Windows, see the operating system's product documentation for information about how to enable NTLM 2 support. For network devices, see the device's product documentation or Web site for information about how to enable NTLM 2 support or download a firmware update that supports NTLM 2. This is the preferred solution.
        *

            If you cannot update the computers running operating systems other than Windows or your network devices to support NTLM 2, change the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa\LMCompatibilityLevel registry value on the computer running Windows Vista to 1. This solution is not recommended.


If you didn't know this ahead of time, just how long would it have taken you to log into a Linux SAMBA share and started a file transfer. Getting logged in was the problem.

I like the don't change Vista, change the entire rest of your network solution

Because, y'know, there's absolutely no way someone, say, Microsoft could develop an add-on that allows Office 2000/XP/2003 users to read OOXML documents. Absolutely no way.

I thought there was an update for the past few versions of Office that allowed docx files to be read.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=941B3470-3AE9-4AEE-8F43-C6BB74CD1466&displaylang=en

here are the appropriate instructions clippy

Finally a flash game that's on topic!

http://www.microsoft.com/taiwan/office/clippy/game.html

The format war is the main reason why most people stick with MS Office. And well... let's take a look at Microsoft's balance sheets.

So, "Microsoft adopting ODF"? Or even "Microsoft not sabotaging ODF plugins"? No freaking way.

it is not windows 'dir' but dos 'dir'

Now, don't go letting a Linux guy show up your lack of Windows knowledge! ;-) Not only is the relatively crippled cmd.exe a full Windows XP dir-lovin' app according to Microsoft http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/cmd.mspx?mfr=true, but the new and advanced Microsoft Windows PowerShell or MSH http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_PowerShell uses dir as well. (Dir is also aliased to ls, in a nod to popular *nix shells.)

MSH is optional for current XP and Vista products, but will be installed by default with Server 2008. So it's rather awkward to claim 'dir' is not a Windows command. ;-)

Christ, yes. Propagandist is more accurate.

Back in the Day, Microsoft's European DirectX 'evangelist' paid a visit to our game dev studio to try to sell us on the benefits of Direct X Retarded Mode. We had our engine running with D3DRM and Glide (I said, back in the Day), and the Glide framerate was easily twice that of D3DRM. He told us that that was impossible. We said "Look at the screen.". He literally refused to look. He just insisted that we were wrong, that there was no reason that D3DRM should be slower than Glide, and that we must therefore be doing something wrong. Did I mention that he wouldn't look at the screen?

Needless to say, we didn't even offer him lunch.

They actually have a privacy policy.

You mean the link that says "Privacy Policy" at the bottom of the Google Maps API page which links to, maybe, the google privacy policy doesn't actually exist?

Dang. My mind is more powerful than I thought!

(for reference, the MS Maps privacy policy is here).

I recently discovered MapCruncher which is a super cool add-on for the Microsoft Virtual Earth API. Basically, if you have any of your own high resolution maps (like PDF of a floorplan or bicycle route or whatever) you can align it to Virtual Earth and MapCruncher writes the thousands of tiny image tiles needed to make your map easily browsable right on top of Virtual Earth. Google doesn't have anything like this. (Even though Google Earth has an "image overlay" feature, they have nothing that runs in the browser, plus it forces the user to download the entire overlay image instead of just the tiny pieces they're trying to view.)

MapCruncher rocks!

Essentially, they spent countless millions on something that is going nowhere and their revenue stream continues to come from a product that has already been established. Since the stock market is forward looking, this completely shakes investor confidence that MS management knows their head from their arse.

Armchair all you want, but

Microsoft's 2007 FY financials

scroll down to 'financial highlights':

Revenue is up 15% from last year.
Operating income is up 12% from last year.
Our revenue growth was driven primarily by licensing of the 2007 Microsoft Office system and Windows Vista, both of which became generally available in January 2007, and increased revenue associated with SQL Server, Windows Server, and client access license suites. Foreign currency exchange rates accounted for a $231 million or a two percentage point increase in revenue.
Our operating income growth was driven primarily by the increased revenue and decreased costs for legal settlements and legal contingencies, partially offset by increased cost of revenue associated with Xbox 360 and Windows Vista and increased sales and marketing expenses

They attribute increased income, in part, to Vista. I'm not sure who I believe, you or them ...

PhxBlue: MS still posts updates for Office 2000. See http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifeoffice : "Office 2000 - Microsoft will continue to offer mainstream support for Office 2000 through June 30, 2004. The Office 2000 extended support period will last from July 1, 2004 through July 14, 2009. The latest Office 2000 service pack is required for hotfix support."

Also, my old test machines at work still sees old Office 2000 updates as well. The thing is on Windows 98 SE laptop/notebook, it was working until last month's updates. :(

Some factors affect the uptake of Vista:
1. It needs a lot more RAM. Or atleast people seem to think so.
2. People are waiting for it to "settle down" - probably until Service Pack 1 is released.
3. There is a lot of confusion about different Vista versions.

There is also the issue of some drivers not being available. But things will settle down soon enough. One year is not that long of a timeframe to wean marketshare away from one operating system monopoly to another.

Here, I'll explain why Visio not being activated prevents you from installing Office add-ons in one sentence:

Visio is part of Office.

Let me know if you need any other facts. Otherwise, you are free to continue making false claims (Not just the parent, pretty much all of /.).

I consider Visio to be part of Office. It has the same activation procedure, you can get information and updates for Visio from the Office website, and it is a personal productivity application. When I google "visio" the top result is http://office.microsoft.com/visio/ . I think it's a safe assumption that Microsoft has correlated Visio with Office.

Except that Visio is part of Office. It's full name is "Microsoft Office Visio" (http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/visio/default.aspx).

Riiight.. Remote desktop? Piece of cake! Howabout hacking the non-Server termsrv.dll? Terminal Server? For what? Office? Have 10MB of RAM per user ready. Ouch. Virtual Server? Not ready for production.

  And none of this addresses my original point: Out of the box, users get a small bit of handholding to guide them through XP's detailed permissions. Either it's the dumb-down interface or the whole kaboodle. XP is a solid OS for stability.

  Look, I'm coding up a large office Automation server and get to enjoy their help files like this. No office app designed for multi-user, server-based hosting. Nice. The MVC pattern is what, 15 years old now?

  As to the rest of my rant, I see your retort explains everything. Perhaps you like XP's GDI, Win32. Funny sense of design, you. Vista is a necessary upgrade - it was simply done wrong.

Riiight.. Remote desktop? Piece of cake! Howabout hacking the non-Server termsrv.dll? Terminal Server? For what? Office? Have 10MB of RAM per user ready. Ouch. Virtual Server? Not ready for production.

  And none of this addresses my original point: Out of the box, users get a small bit of handholding to guide them through XP's detailed permissions. Either it's the dumb-down interface or the whole kaboodle. XP is a solid OS for stability.

  Look, I'm coding up a large office Automation server and get to enjoy their help files like this. No office app designed for multi-user, server-based hosting. Nice. The MVC pattern is what, 15 years old now?

  As to the rest of my rant, I see your retort explains everything. Perhaps you like XP's GDI, Win32. Funny sense of design, you. Vista is a necessary upgrade - it was simply done wrong.

Riiight.. Remote desktop? Piece of cake! Howabout hacking the non-Server termsrv.dll? Terminal Server? For what? Office? Have 10MB of RAM per user ready. Ouch. Virtual Server? Not ready for production.

  And none of this addresses my original point: Out of the box, users get a small bit of handholding to guide them through XP's detailed permissions. Either it's the dumb-down interface or the whole kaboodle. XP is a solid OS for stability.

  Look, I'm coding up a large office Automation server and get to enjoy their help files like this. No office app designed for multi-user, server-based hosting. Nice. The MVC pattern is what, 15 years old now?

  As to the rest of my rant, I see your retort explains everything. Perhaps you like XP's GDI, Win32. Funny sense of design, you. Vista is a necessary upgrade - it was simply done wrong.

Office validation should be concerned about office & not anything else. It shouldn't
be SPYING on anything else.

I'm not defending this bad user experience, however, it IS a part of Office: Microsoft Office Visio. It's not spying, rather, it's recognizing an unactivated component. This is just a bug in the Office updater that'll hopefully be fixed soon.

If you look at MS's site, you'll find that Visio is considered an Office product. So, to clarify, he activated Office, installed (but did not activate) a new part of Office, and now it won't let him install Office add-ons. This is entirely an Office issue. You may not like what they're doing, but this has no bearing on whether it will have problems with an unactivated non-Office product. If it did, I would be mightily pissed.

Visio == part of the Office suite. It's tied to other parts of office both from a conceptual and technical standpoint(insert office integration marketing bullet points that I don't care about here). How does this translate to 'spying on anything else'? Activation is lame in general, but it's not like I installed Mechwarrior 4 and Office started screaming that it needed to be reactivated. Rather, I installed an additional, optional Office component.

http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/visio/default.aspx

I'm not defending activation here, far from it-

But Visio probably updates through the Office 2007 manager rather than stand alone and that's the reason Office 2007 won't update in general.

Which leads to some proper questions:

If Visio requires separate activation than shouldn't it require a separate update path?

If not, then shouldn't the updater be smart enough to update only the activated components?

And overall, what does this say about the concept of SEPARATE products requiring SEPARATE activation but morphing into a SINGULAR app. Does this not, in fact, affect my future upgradeability? (Oh sorry, you integrated Visio in 2007, for Office 2010 your only upgrade path is Office 2010 Ultimate)

Ost is the offline mirror of the crap on the server. The pst is your local archive (which, trust me, still exists in Outlook/Exchange systems). Most Exchange setups require people archive mail past a certain point, because the storage demands get obscene pretty quick.

As for the massive files, I don't know what to tell ya. I still have to fix the 2 gig ones, and we're on 2003. We have a bunch of users using Entourage which may be the source of the bulk of the pst issues; I don't manage (or particularly care for) Exchange, I just know what I have to deal with.

For example, I have a desktop running Windows 2000 which gets Extended support until July 2010. Most useful non-free software continues to support Windows 2000, but a few non-Microsoft apps (like Photoshop) are dropping W2K support with their new versions. Of course, MS is dropping support with their apps (Office, IE, Media Player) because they want users to upgrade Windows. Also, there's less incentive to update freeware for W2K.

For example, I have a desktop running Windows 2000 which gets Extended support until July 2010. Most useful non-free software continues to support Windows 2000, but a few non-Microsoft apps (like Photoshop) are dropping W2K support with their new versions. Of course, MS is dropping support with their apps (Office, IE, Media Player) because they want users to upgrade Windows. Also, there's less incentive to update freeware for W2K.

Drivers and kernel aside, Vista changed one huge thing: through UAC, people can no longer write files to Program Files.

The only reasons I switched to XP from 2000:

1. Much better USB support
2. Remote Desktop built in

I agree with your first point; every Windows version from 95 to XP had far superior USB support, and Vista likely continues that with Bluetooth. I disagree with your second point; Remote Desktop for Win9x and Win2k is a very simple install.

Despite MS's apparent strategy of forcing upgrades and the like, they seem quite happy back-porting various "new" OS concepts to previous versions; Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer 5 (6?) did this for Win2k to feel like XP, and IE7 and those desktop widgit thingies do that for XP to look like Vista.

(You'll have to excuse my limited Vista knowledge; my last Windows desktop ran 2000 until a fatal error finals week of 2003 when I installed Debian so that I could finish a final paper. After that, I've supported XP and 2003 at work, but I've avoided Vista more fervently than Jehovah's Witnesses.)