Slashdot Mirror

Yes, you're right, we build on existing standards: XML, CSS, XPath, XML Schema data types...

As for your point about breaking existing content, it perplexes me that you keep making it.

But, let's try a test.

1. Visit http://www.microsoft.com/ in FireFox and note the results.
2. Install the XForms XPI from http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xforms and restart Firefox.
3. Visit http://www.microsoft.com/ again and see if adding XForms support to the browser breaks existing content.

Thanks!

Unless there's a good C# SQL wrapper that I don't know about

The Entity Framework in ADO.Net 3.0 combined with Language INtegrated query (Linq) C# language extensions is going to change how you write data based applications. Dispite my obvious bias this is one of the coolest things I've seen in quite a while.

LINQ and ADO.NET Entities: Video Podcast
http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=2021 38
Whitepaper:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/default.aspx?pul l=/library/en-us/dnvs05/html/nxtgenda.asp
Screencast: (see the code)
http://blogs.msdn.com/adonet/archive/2006/07/11/66 2454.aspx

create procedure myTestProc @someDateTime datetime = '1/1/2050' as
--put insert, delete, update here....
select * from someTable
where (@someDateTime >= someTable.someDate or @someDateTime = '1/1/2050')

create procedure myTestProc @someDateTime datetime = NULL as
--put insert, delete, update here....
select * from someTable
where (@someDateTime >= COALESCE(@someDateTime, someTable.someDate)

If there's a single example of Microsoft innovation to point out it'd be LINQ.

Check it out: http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/ref/linq/

The cool thing is that the query language can be adapted to ANYTHING, even Reflection.

Actually MS is getting ready to introduce something very much like an ORM layer called LINQ/DLINQ. You can find out more here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/ref/linq/

all those comments and not 1 mention of the real fix? you need to install a hotfix from Microsoft, there are copies of it floating around the net because ms refuses to make it publicly available, but if you call them and they determin that your problems will be fixed by the patch they will give it to you.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=896256 has the info but no download link.

Windows PE. http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/sa/ben efits/winpe.mspx

Or Windows PE with modifications. http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/

Major hardware vendors have been doing this with Microsoft OS's for years. HP has their smart start CDs that come with server rigs, and their restore disks that come with workstations that are all based off of the Unattended install principle. Other major vendors (dell, gateway) are no exception. It seems pretty much everybody who deals with thousands of systems knows and uses this capability. The article is just a dog and pony show, touting how wonderful it's going to be now that Microsoft is the gatekeeper of unattended installs. This stuff dates back to win2k, and probably earlier. Ok, so the HAL is no longer an issue for people who liked to goober things with hardware specific images. From the sound of it, the option of a hardware specific image is gone, so the Pro is we lose features?

Oh wait, it looks like the *biggest* change is that unattended.txt (the configuration file for automated installs) is now unattended.xml. Other good ideas used to further extend the Microsoft monopoly on your workstation environment include "binary based image format" (like people have had with ghost for years...)

I've still failed to realise why this would be interesting to someone other than people who work in IT, and even then it fails to be more than a footnote to the vista image deployment gotchas.

Major hardware vendors have been doing this with Microsoft OS's for years. HP has their smart start CDs that come with server rigs, and their restore disks that come with workstations that are all based off of the Unattended install principle. Other major vendors (dell, gateway) are no exception. It seems pretty much everybody who deals with thousands of systems knows and uses this capability. The article is just a dog and pony show, touting how wonderful it's going to be now that Microsoft is the gatekeeper of unattended installs. This stuff dates back to win2k, and probably earlier. Ok, so the HAL is no longer an issue for people who liked to goober things with hardware specific images. From the sound of it, the option of a hardware specific image is gone, so the Pro is we lose features?

Oh wait, it looks like the *biggest* change is that unattended.txt (the configuration file for automated installs) is now unattended.xml. Other good ideas used to further extend the Microsoft monopoly on your workstation environment include "binary based image format" (like people have had with ghost for years...)

I've still failed to realise why this would be interesting to someone other than people who work in IT, and even then it fails to be more than a footnote to the vista image deployment gotchas.

Simple solution - immediately before you upgrade a major component, run:
sysprep -nosidgen

You have the choice of running with existing settings or running mini-setup if you're running XP SP2. The only thing I can't recall is what effect that'll have on activation...

Otherwise the only other thing you'll have problems with is changing the underlying HAL from ACPI to non-ACPI.

See: MS sysprep kb article and more usefully Killian's sysprep guide

Whether the ability to design a big Active Directory structure qualifies someone to call himself an engineer is probably debatable. Afterall, there are housewives who call themselves "domestic engineers", garbage men to call themselves "sanitation engineers", etc.

Whether the ability to design a big Active Directory structure qualifies someone to call himself an engineer is probably debatable. Afterall, there are housewives who call themselves "domestic engineers", garbage men to call themselves "sanitation engineers", etc.

Whether the ability to design a big Active Directory structure qualifies someone to call himself an engineer is probably debatable. Afterall, there are housewives who call themselves "domestic engineers", garbage men to call themselves "sanitation engineers", etc.

Just because the largest portion of MySpace users seem to have hideous pages doesn't mean that those running MySpace are complete morons and can't manage their system.

Stop sucking and install the MS hotfix and/or the new AMD core syncing tool

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=896256
For the 32bit XP bug that hoses some games on X2

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/utili ties/Setup.exe
For the AMD 'dual core optimizer' that fixes the core syncing problem with some crappily coded games.

with these two, there are no game problems with X2.

Since when has Slashdot become an outlet for Microsoft propaganda?

http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/0 7/20/2047250
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/19/217 218&tid=109
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/23/032 255

All deriving from:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/winxp/ windowsprinciples.mspx

The list could be titled: Twelve ways to avoid being a monopoly or Twelve ways to avoid pissing off customers and third party developers. If Microsoft really takes these twelve items to heart, it could be a big shift for them. It would certainly go a long way to change my perception of the company. I might even consider using Windows again at some point.

Agreed. This is a big move, and obviously it is done for Microsoft's business purposes (ie. "profit"), and I expect it to be successfull.

My first reaction was to check whether Microsoft had posted this their web site, which would be a strong indication of whether this is just a publicity announcement, or a serious commitment.

12 tenets

It is there, together with this statement

Microsoft will post these principles to its Web site so that they will be readily accessible to the computer industry and customers. We will review these principles from time to time, and at least once every three years, to determine whether we should adopt additional principles or modify existing principles to reflect technological, business or legal developments.

I'm no lawyer, but I suspect that this is close to legal accountability. So, if I buy a Microsoft product, and Microsoft fails to observe these tenets, then I (or me, IBM and Oracle), can sue Microsoft for breach of contract. Note that the announcement was made by a lawyer. It is, at the very least, moral accountability - Microsoft have attached their name to it, and their name will go down if they fail to observe it.

So, I expect that Microsoft will fully comply with it's own tenets.

Now, I believe that this is a major development in the software business. Microsoft's biggest obstacle to further growth, and maintaining a legal (as opposed to illegal) monopoly, is probably the reputation they have built over the years for predatory business practices. Customers and goverments everywhere are suspicious of them, and look for alternatives in order to keep Microsoft's tentacles out. We can argue forever about the quality of their products, and TCO, but the fact is that for most people, Microsofts products are (1) familiar, installed, and in constant use (2) functionally, if not "ideal", then at least "good enough". Most people, including many who are technically literate, have no strong business incentive to ditch Microsoft - the main reason they consider going to open source is the perception of Microsoft as a corporate bully, and exploiter of the customer, and the contrary perception of Open Source as offering freedom.

With this commitment, Microsoft will shed all these negative images. It's products are already trusted by most people, and now it's corporate image, and product strategy, will also be trusted. Those of use who have seen, and suffered, the "evil" Microsoft will not forget, but it will be of historical interest only. We may think it unfair that Microsoft was able to clean up it's image after they unfairly acquired a monopoly, but our resentment will not affect anyone elses purchasing decision.

FOSS is now going to have to be good enough to persuade people to switch on grounds of quality and cost alone, without using "Microsoft is evil" as a selling point for itself.

One of the things I most admire about Microsoft is their strategic ability, and timing. They have repeatedly made the right business decision, at the right time, often surprising the industry, and bringing scorn, but also backing those decisions, and being proven right. Sometimes the decisions have seemed ahead of their time (eg. the GUI server), and sometimes they have seemed to be late (as in this case), but they have many winnners, and few losers.

• Early 80's - PC software as a business
• Early 80's - The decision to licence DOS to IBM, rather than sell it
• Late 80' - Focusing on gra

If it takes over the world, neo will just have to find a hole in the Internet Explorer 2199
http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/

"With Remote Desktop> on Windows I do not need physical access"

Wrong once again. By default, passwordless accounts cannot be used to connect to a Windows XP machine remotely.

"These are not transactional databases. They are stored as tables in one database,"

They are transactional, and they are not stored a tables in one database.

which is open for modification from amy installation program."

If that installation program has admin rights, yes. What is your point?

Here is some advice for you. If you are going to criticize Windows, try learning a thing or two about it first.

"With Remote Desktop> on Windows I do not need physical access"

Wrong once again. By default, passwordless accounts cannot be used to connect to a Windows XP machine remotely.

"These are not transactional databases. They are stored as tables in one database,"

They are transactional, and they are not stored a tables in one database.

which is open for modification from amy installation program."

If that installation program has admin rights, yes. What is your point?

Here is some advice for you. If you are going to criticize Windows, try learning a thing or two about it first.

They are twelve ways to deny all of those?

10. Communications protocols. Microsoft will make available, on commercially reasonable terms, all of the communications protocols that it has built into Windows and that are used to facilitate communication with server versions of Windows. To facilitate this, Microsoft will document protocols supported in Windows as part of the product design process. We will also work closely with firms with particular needs to address interoperability scenarios that may require licensing of other protocols.

11. Availability of Microsoft patents. Microsoft will generally license patents on its operating system inventions (other than those that differentiate the appearance of Microsoft's products) on fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft's intellectual property rights.

I also found the 12th point interesting:

12. Standards. Microsoft is committed to supporting a wide range of industry standards in Windows that developers can use to build interoperable products. Microsoft is committed to contributing to industry standard bodies as well as working to establish standards via ad hoc relationships with others in the industry.

The second sentence is interesting in its own right. I, for one, cannot interpret it to mean anything but inventing their own, new standard instead of the ones that already exist and work. "[W]orking to establish standards via ad hoc relationships with others in the industry" doesn't even need a comment...

All the other tenets were pretty well summed up by another poster as "don't poison the customer", "don't shoot the customer", "don't bomb the distributor" and "don't ignore direct orders from a court of law". They are probably reserving the rights to boiling the customer, burying the distributor alive and following order from a court of law at their own pace, however.

FYI:
According to http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/inside_ms.mspx
1975 Microsoft founded
Jan. 1, 1979 Microsoft moves from Albuquerque, New Mexico to Bellevue, Washington
June 25, 1981 Microsoft incorporates
Aug. 12, 1981 IBM introduces its personal computer with Microsoft's 16-bit operating system, MS-DOS 1.0
Feb. 26, 1986 Microsoft moves to corporate campus in Redmond, Washington
March 13, 1986 Microsoft stock goes public
Aug. 1, 1989 Microsoft introduces earliest version of Office suite of productivity applications
May 22, 1990 Microsoft launches Windows 3.0

Will they charge the card? I dont know.

We're going to have to give up on recognition and put more effort into partitioning. We need setups where each web page renders in its own jail, and it doesn't matter if the browser is insecure - when the page closes, a program exits and any corrupted info goes away.

Of course, this will break Active-X, toolbars, downloads, etc. Then again, on business systems, you want those things broken.

Once the browser is locked down like that, you need a "guard" program. When you want to move a file out of a browser's jail, it has to go through a program that "sanitizes" it. Often, a translation to a well-documented format that doesn't contain execution capability will do the job.

Yeah, that's a very good idea... and that's why Microsoft has implemented almost exactly that with Internet Explorer 7+ in Vista. It's called "Protected Mode".
Here's a good starting point to read about the technology.

ActiveX controls and toolbars can still operate inside this jailed environment (keep in mind that conceptually, binary code and toolbars aren't the -problem- ... it's what they're able to access that has been the problem), but they don't have access to anything outside of it. If, due to the nature of the plug-in, it really should be able to work with the user's files, there is the Protected Mode API which gives plug-in developers their only way out of the jail, and it's extremely limited... basically, you can find out where you're allowed to write to on the file system or registry (for storing configuration information), and you can trigger a save dialog that is executed in the context of the parent IE process (the one that isn't jailed), and you can trigger the file save... and that's about it.

When the file save happens, Internet Explorer makes use of the OS's Attachment Execution Service interface to save the file. This is something that was introduced with XP SP2, and it offers a couple of things: it lets anti-virus, anti-malware etc. applications hook in and scan the file and give the thumbs-up before allowing the save. In other words, the file doesn't even touch the non-jailed environment (ie. your regular user profile) before it gets scanned. Another thing the AES does is attach the source URL of the file (if appropriate), and store it in an NTFS alternate data stream. AES is also used by Outlook Express (Windows Mail in Vista) and Microsoft's various IM programs.

As for sanitising data, go ahead and put an application out onto the market that will automatically translate Office document formats into equivalent OpenOffice formats if you like. I'm sure some people would be interested in it, though bear in mind that the Office formats contain a bunch of features that ODF doesn't support yet (ODF doesn't have a facility for highlighting text in a way that's distinct from background colours, for example)...

We're going to have to give up on recognition and put more effort into partitioning. We need setups where each web page renders in its own jail, and it doesn't matter if the browser is insecure - when the page closes, a program exits and any corrupted info goes away.

Of course, this will break Active-X, toolbars, downloads, etc. Then again, on business systems, you want those things broken.

Once the browser is locked down like that, you need a "guard" program. When you want to move a file out of a browser's jail, it has to go through a program that "sanitizes" it. Often, a translation to a well-documented format that doesn't contain execution capability will do the job.

Yeah, that's a very good idea... and that's why Microsoft has implemented almost exactly that with Internet Explorer 7+ in Vista. It's called "Protected Mode".
Here's a good starting point to read about the technology.

ActiveX controls and toolbars can still operate inside this jailed environment (keep in mind that conceptually, binary code and toolbars aren't the -problem- ... it's what they're able to access that has been the problem), but they don't have access to anything outside of it. If, due to the nature of the plug-in, it really should be able to work with the user's files, there is the Protected Mode API which gives plug-in developers their only way out of the jail, and it's extremely limited... basically, you can find out where you're allowed to write to on the file system or registry (for storing configuration information), and you can trigger a save dialog that is executed in the context of the parent IE process (the one that isn't jailed), and you can trigger the file save... and that's about it.

When the file save happens, Internet Explorer makes use of the OS's Attachment Execution Service interface to save the file. This is something that was introduced with XP SP2, and it offers a couple of things: it lets anti-virus, anti-malware etc. applications hook in and scan the file and give the thumbs-up before allowing the save. In other words, the file doesn't even touch the non-jailed environment (ie. your regular user profile) before it gets scanned. Another thing the AES does is attach the source URL of the file (if appropriate), and store it in an NTFS alternate data stream. AES is also used by Outlook Express (Windows Mail in Vista) and Microsoft's various IM programs.

As for sanitising data, go ahead and put an application out onto the market that will automatically translate Office document formats into equivalent OpenOffice formats if you like. I'm sure some people would be interested in it, though bear in mind that the Office formats contain a bunch of features that ODF doesn't support yet (ODF doesn't have a facility for highlighting text in a way that's distinct from background colours, for example)...

Converting incoming .doc files to Open Document XML format, for example.

It's quite possible to completely solve this problem.

Completely? That's a strong word. What if someone finds a vulnerability in the jail code, or a buffer overflow in the Open Document XML parser? Everyone thought images were completely safe because there's no code, but a vulnerability was found nonetheless.

LS

Require all users to run as a limited user as per Principle of Least Privilege. This is the key. I once had a computer lab for inner city youth with no AV software at all, just limited user accounts and a simple router. Once we could afford Symantec AV Corporate (I work for a non profit) and ran the scans, no viruses. If anyplace was bound to get one, that would have been it.

the scientists aim to reconstruct a draft of the 3 billion building blocks of the Neanderthal genome

Don't be silly :). I really can't talk about competitors openly, but you needn't look much farther than the Microsoft Expression suite to see there's competition. Almost every Adobe product has competitors.

Google had a net income of $721 million, according to TFA. Microsoft's net income last quarter was $2.83 billion in their last report.

So, Microsoft still have a far greater net income than Google. Still, Google is rising fast. Will we someday see Google's net income overtake that of Microsoft, I wonder?

Um, device drivers certainly DO NOT depend on Win32. Win32 is an environment subsystem that sits on top of the NT native API, which combined with other kernel mode functions, are what device drivers use. Up until NT4, Win32 was implemented entirely in user mode; drivers couldn't call into Win32 then and they don't now. There is no interface to call Win32 functions from kernel mode; there are no Win32 headers in the DDK. The new UMDF is designed for code written in C++ using COM. Win32 is supported, but IDK if using the CLR (i.e. .NET) is possible.

You're right that there is a huge dependency on Win32, though. All user-mode software in and for Windows depends on Win32 except the Session Manager, autochk and a few third-party boot time defragmenters. I, too, had once hoped that Win32 with its ugliness could become depreciated, secondary to something better such as .NET. Technically, this would be possible by creating a .NET environment subsystem independent of Win32, and moving core components over to the .NET subsystem. The performance of graphics and sound systems needn't suffer; they'd just go through an API translation layer (like the one that has always existed from Win32 to the native api). Unfortunately, at this point Microsoft seems to have invested so much into Win32 that it'll probably stay where it is for the lifetime of NT.

As for competing VMs like Java, ideally they would each be built inside their own subsystem independent of either Win32 or .NET, each using the same interfaces for system services. Realistically, they'd continue to use Win32 plus some extra functions. Reactos is planning a real Java subsystem, however.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/winxp/ WindowsPrinciples.mspx

11th tenet: "11. Availability of Microsoft patents. Microsoft will generally license patents on its operating system inventions (other than those that differentiate the appearance of Microsoft's products) on fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft's intellectual property rights."

This means that OS will not be licensed patents. Neither will anyone be licensed patents for free.

The MS strategy has not changed ... crush the competition (which is OSS) in the courts.

Microsoft doesn't have to sell its software to vendors. Vendors sign a pre-sale contract promising to do and refrain from doing certain things with the software they resell to customers. A market economy wouldn't force Microsoft to sell their software except on their own terms.

Microsoft will not retaliate against any computer manufacturer that supports non-Microsoft software. To provide transparency on this point, Microsoft will post a standard volume-based price list to a Web site that is accessible to computer manufacturers, as it has under the U.S. antitrust ruling. Windows royalties will be determined based on that price list, without regard to any decisions the computer manufacturer makes concerning the promotion of non-Microsoft software.

The official numbers for Xbox 360 have been released today. There is now a 5 million installed base already. (source[ppt])

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/winxp/ WindowsPrinciples.mspx

Microsoft will not retaliate against any computer manufacturer that supports non-Microsoft software. To provide transparency on this point, Microsoft will post a standard volume-based price list to a Web site that is accessible to computer manufacturers, as it has under the U.S. antitrust ruling. Windows royalties will be determined based on that price list, without regard to any decisions the computer manufacturer makes concerning the promotion of non-Microsoft software.

This 'feature' was released with SP2 and it's called "Set Program Access and Defaults". ironically this was on the top of EVERYone's start menu after installing SP2, yet somehow all of europe missed it.
Aparently you need eyedoctors as much as you need orthodontists.

here's the link nubsauce:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=332003

"We touched on this yesterday, but the 12 tenets weren't clear at that point ... ", so we touch on it again tdday, but still fail to provide the official URL to the actual 12 tenets (a URL which was released yesterday, so the 12 tenets were indeed clear).

Anyway, here's the official link:
Windows Principles: Twelve Tenets to Promote Competition

(Note that according to the text, the tenets are in keeping with and following the spirit of the MS/USDOJ settlement, rather than having to do with EU fines (though the latter likely played a role).)

Graphical User Interfaces are intuitive because you can remember the location of things.

Also to add, it appears that Microsoft's Accessibility page isn't as accessble as the Windows XP Accessibility Resources page...

Comparison here

Also to add, it appears that Microsoft's Accessibility page isn't as accessble as the Windows XP Accessibility Resources page...

Comparison here

Not to be overly paranoid, but this is Microsoft we're discussing

I would emphasize that this is not Microsoft we are talking about. We are talking about Windows. If you read Microsoft's document you'll note it is titled "Windows Principles".

I've read the document carefully, and I see no indication that this philosophy extends to other products. Take for instance the Mappoint web services. A company can use the service to geocode data for use in the Mappoint desktop application. However, the license strictly prohibits the geocoded data from being used in competitive applications such as MapInfo, ESRI, or Google Earth.

On the surface, this appears to be a major philosophy shift for Microsoft. But digging in, it appears to be more-of-the-same except where required by law (ala past Windows antitrust rulings, and avoiding additional future action). I'll be impressed if/when they extend these principals to product lines that they aren't required to.

It's not Fedora (or Red Hat's) fault that the licensing of those products and the US Laws on those subjects are so anal. Welcome to the age of DRM, patents and vendor lock-in due to the 2 previous reasons.

If you didn't know in the USA you are not allowed to reverse-engineer or even include software that is reverse engineered. You are not allowed to import it, export it or use it. Thus MP3, WMV, AAC support or the DRM-versions of it can not be included in a distro for/created in the USA. If you do, you get massive lawsuits or treated as a terrorist. You can of course go and ask permissions and pay big bucks to Fraunhofer/Thomson, MS or Apple.

Welcome to the Nazi world of the 21st century where the Fuhrers are big companies and the Gestapo respectively SS is represented by lawyers and government. Oh, you can of course always rat out at your favorite kamerat.

Oh, gee, the Microsoft employees who develop Microsoft Flight Simulator are upbeat about DirectX 10?

According to Microsoft themselves, FSX is developed by "game developer ACES". I'm not sure what this means, but my guess is that ACES is a game studio that develop the game with Microsoft as the publisher.

Hah. They've already lost to the EU courts, but still fail to admit it. From here:

"Communications protocols. Microsoft will make available, on commercially reasonable terms, all of the communications protocols that it has built into Windows and that are used to facilitate communication with server versions of Windows. To facilitate this, Microsoft will document protocols supported in Windows as part of the product design process. We will also work closely with firms with particular needs to address interoperability scenarios that may require licensing of other protocols."

It's the 'commercially reasonable terms' and 'licensing of other protocols' that the EU courts are unhappy with, as that does not comply with their ruling. Effectively, you can get access to some of microsoft's SMB and CIFS info, but only if you pay for it and don't use it to write GPL code. Plus, this only appears to apply to new code, they're rather quiet on documenting their existing protocols properly, rather than 'part of the product design process'.

This bit shows they're only doing what they were forced to do by the US anti-trust case, and they're doing the bare minimum to give the appearance of fair play so they don't get hit again. If they had really changed their spots, they'd commit to doing what they've been ordered to do by the EU anti-trust courts.

Aside from reparing an old design flaw which had long been unexploited, I don't know how much more Microsoft could do.
Let the flamewar begin :)

Focusing solely on what's actually used is part of the degradation of NT that's been going on for years [...]

Focusing solely on what's actually used is part of the degradation of NT that's been going on for years [...]

Focusing solely on what's actually used is part of the degradation of NT that's been going on for years [...]