Slashdot Mirror

have you ever heard of virtual pc?

You could have run it "(a decent design/admin GUI for PostgreSQL)" in emulation. Why didn't you? "Had I been able to boot into Windows to use that one tool (or even better, used it under emulation/virtualisation while still in MacOS), I would almost certainly have ended up with a Mac."

http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/virtualpc/vi rtualpc.aspx?pid=virtualpc

Remember, just because you don't know how to use it, it doesn't mean that the tool isn't there for you to use.

Remember, just because you don't know how to use it, it doesn't mean that the tool isn't there for you to use.

"Windows also lacks free dev tools"

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/

Wasn't Microsoft claiming that it would protect all users of its software from intellectual property threats? Wasn't Microsoft suggesting that Linux/Open Source software was unable to provide indemnification in this way, and using this in its fight to bring down Linux/Open Soruce?

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts /topics/policy.mspx

So why isn't Microsoft offering the same protection for Xbox users? Is it because it doesn't have enough power behind it to fight back against these issues in the console market?

THIS LICENSE MAY NOT BE SHARED, TRANSFERRED TO OR USED CONCURRENTLY ON DIFFERENT COMPUTERS. The SOFTWARE is licensed with the HARDWARE as a single integrated product and may only be used with the HARDWARE. If the SOFTWARE is not accompanied by new HARDWARE, you may not use the SOFTWARE. You may permanently transfer all of your rights under this EULA only as part of a permanent sale or transfer of the HARDWARE, provided you retain no copies, if you transfer all of the SOFTWARE (including all component parts, the media and printed materials, any upgrades, this EULA and the Certificate of Authenticity), and the recipient agrees to the terms of this EULA.

Bill Gates is a big fan of using Microsoft software (go figure)...

If Bill can't do his job without having to use another company's product that would be a key indicator to him that something is not quite right in the world...

Perhaps he's just waiting for the boys to finish Microsoft's own electronic whiteboard.

Heh, I keep doing that. Actually, that is the exact reason I typo'd it. I am working on an MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) search program for work for the last month :) We scan in all our MSDS to pdf format and archive it. Ever since I started the project I keep typing it in, like: http://msds.microsoft.com/ LOL :D

Pretty good catch ;)

Where to go when you want to learn more about Linux - http://www.microsoft.com/linux.asp

I think it is an issue with the PDC emulation of your server. Microsoft released a patch to this problem a few years ago.

I agree with you overall, but I do take issue with this point. In the beginning it wasn't certain that there would be a clearly defined court case. Most Linux supporters felt that since development was done in the open it would be difficult if not impossible to get improper code accepted into the Linux kernel. However, there were those who felt that since there wasn't a central authority vetting the code it would be easy for someone to misappropriate code and have it accepted.

Another interesting connection is that intellectual property issues are frequently presented as a reason to go with Windows on Microsoft's Get the Facts website. For example, Radio Shack's case study mentions reducing "exposure to the risk of intellectual property infringement claims" as a reason to go with Windows over Linux. Before SCO starting suing their customers for using Linux, who was worried about a lawsuit over their choice of operating system?

I think Microsoft is responsible to some degree for SCO's suit. I think someone didn't fully understand the way Linux development happens and badly miscalculated the effect of the lawsuit on IBM. If IBM had quickly settled then there would be plenty of room for "no smoke without fire" FUD about the risk of improper code in Linux. Because the suit has gone on for so long and there have been so many people with enough stake in vindicating Linux there have been multiple opportunities for demonstrating that there is no infringing code.

I agree with you overall, but I do take issue with this point. In the beginning it wasn't certain that there would be a clearly defined court case. Most Linux supporters felt that since development was done in the open it would be difficult if not impossible to get improper code accepted into the Linux kernel. However, there were those who felt that since there wasn't a central authority vetting the code it would be easy for someone to misappropriate code and have it accepted.

Another interesting connection is that intellectual property issues are frequently presented as a reason to go with Windows on Microsoft's Get the Facts website. For example, Radio Shack's case study mentions reducing "exposure to the risk of intellectual property infringement claims" as a reason to go with Windows over Linux. Before SCO starting suing their customers for using Linux, who was worried about a lawsuit over their choice of operating system?

I think Microsoft is responsible to some degree for SCO's suit. I think someone didn't fully understand the way Linux development happens and badly miscalculated the effect of the lawsuit on IBM. If IBM had quickly settled then there would be plenty of room for "no smoke without fire" FUD about the risk of improper code in Linux. Because the suit has gone on for so long and there have been so many people with enough stake in vindicating Linux there have been multiple opportunities for demonstrating that there is no infringing code.

This was already shown to be a vulnerability back in 01. Funny how it's still around 5 years later...asleep at the wheel in Redmond. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin /MS01-027.mspx

There's been an outlook client on the Mac since forever.

Yes and no. For the past several years, MSFT has taken the position that the preferred Exchange client on the Mac is Entourage (part of the Mac Office suite). The problem is that Entourage doesn't "speak" MAPI and instead relies on a semi-kludge of synchronizing through Exchange webmail/WebDAV. It also will not work with Exchange servers older than 2000/SP2. At my office, I can use Entourage to sync nicely with my e-mail, but the calendaring functionality is completely broken, as are task lists etc. (this might be cured if you have a newer version of Exchange than we do). For those interested, Microsoft has a guide for Exchange admins with Entourage users.

As you mentioned, there is a true Outlook client for the Mac that synchronizes natively with Exchange servers - but it was dropped in favor of Entourage years ago and hence was never Carbonized to run natively under OS X. So running the program under Classic (which isn't even an option on the Intel Macs) would be your only way of getting 100% Outlook functionality. As a result, those users on Intel Macs or those looking for true OS X solutions are very much stuck with using Windows to get the full functionality.

I wonder what he uses...*cough*GDS*cough* :)

Or perhaps he is using his own software?

This might be helpful - Embedding SQL Server Express into Custom Applications

The only reason for Apple not allowing XP booting would be if Apple were truly scared. If it thought that OS X wasn't up to snuff and the OS X applications (iLife, iWork et al) were lame, then it should shy away from Windows booting. Instead it is trusting its technology and giving its users more options.

Do they think Front Row will look like simple shareware in comparison to Media Center? There's a reason Front Row's remote has only six buttons: it doesn't do much compared to XP MCE. I'm not saying that XP is better than OS X, but for many home users, the Media Center interface is something that Apple hasn't come close to matching.

I hope my speculation is wrong and Apple soon adds XP MCE support to Boot Camp. I'm sure most home Boot Camp users would like the Media Center version of XP better than Home or Pro.

I have. You can see the Brave New EULA at this URL:

http://www.microsoft.com/uk/windows/licensing/howt ouse.mspx

Read it and weep. Your (more or less) useable, legit copy of WinXP/Vista is invalid *if your PC dies or retires*. Don't you just love Micro$oft?

Thanks to Slashdotter aj50 for original post of the link.

This is an exerpt from my competing book:

"Welcome to SQL Server 2005 Express. You most likely installed this product as part of Visual Studio 2005. Your next step is to freak out and get a version that costs money, because the express edition lacks the most basic administration tool that you're used to using: the query analyzer. Yes, that's right you have no tool to run arbitrary SQL. And since you're a developer, you'll probably be trying to load a database backup that somebody else gave you as your first step. You can either create an empty database, then run sql against that to create a new database, OR go here and download SQL Server Management Studio Express to make useful a product that is otherwise an aggrandized version of Access."

You can also get to the download from the SQL Server Express Homepage:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/defa ult.mspx

This is an exerpt from my competing book:

"Welcome to SQL Server 2005 Express. You most likely installed this product as part of Visual Studio 2005. Your next step is to freak out and get a version that costs money, because the express edition lacks the most basic administration tool that you're used to using: the query analyzer. Yes, that's right you have no tool to run arbitrary SQL. And since you're a developer, you'll probably be trying to load a database backup that somebody else gave you as your first step. You can either create an empty database, then run sql against that to create a new database, OR go here and download SQL Server Management Studio Express to make useful a product that is otherwise an aggrandized version of Access."

You can also get to the download from the SQL Server Express Homepage:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/editions/express/defa ult.mspx

I think you'll find it's at http://msdn2.microsoft.com/

Howdy - you should take a look at the VS 2005 setup bootstrapper. It'll simplify the process of getting SQL Server Express (SSE) installed onto a deployment machine. You will need to install an instance of SSE onto the deployment machine, though. SSE is a walking, talking, gum-chewing SQL database. There's a pretty useful article over on MSDN Magazine that will walk you through the basics.

That is exactly the case.

Your customer is buying a new computer system and needs it to run the same operating system as their current system - for example Windows 2000 Professional.

You can pre-install Windows XP Professional on the new computer system, then offer to install Windows 2000 Professional, on their behalf.

The customer must supply you with the downgrade media, which must come from a legally licensed version of Microsoft retail, OEM / system builder or volume licensing partners.

Your customer can run Windows 2000 Professional until they are ready to upgrade the system to Windows XP Professional. At that time they would already be licensed for the Windows XP they purchased with this new machine. At no time can they use the 'spare' licence on another PC.

Windows XP Professional has downgrade rights to Windows 2000 Professional, Windows NT Workstation 4.0 and Windows 98 (Second Edition). Windows XP Home does not have downgrade rights.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/0/6/7/067ff 52c-a552-4f6e-852c-03d086b41f68/reimaging.doc

"However, the Microsoft Volume Licensing program does not offer the full version of Microsoft Windows® desktop operating system licenses. The Microsoft Windows desktop operating system should be licensed either pre-installed through the OEM, or as FPP retail product. A volume licensing customer can use their volume licensing media to re-image their Microsoft Windows desktop operating system from an OEM provided that it is the same version and product type as that on the Certificate of Authenticity label that came with the PC."

also:

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/resources/volbr ief.mspx

"Operating System License Requirements: Initial Operating System and Transfer of License

Customers must first have a full desktop operating system installed on their machine before they are eligible to acquire an upgrade license for the Microsoft Windows desktop operating system via Microsoft's volume licensing programs. Customers cannot acquire full Microsoft Windows desktop operating system licenses through Microsoft Volume Licensing programs, only upgrade licenses."

http://download.microsoft.com/download/0/6/7/067ff 52c-a552-4f6e-852c-03d086b41f68/reimaging.doc

"However, the Microsoft Volume Licensing program does not offer the full version of Microsoft Windows® desktop operating system licenses. The Microsoft Windows desktop operating system should be licensed either pre-installed through the OEM, or as FPP retail product. A volume licensing customer can use their volume licensing media to re-image their Microsoft Windows desktop operating system from an OEM provided that it is the same version and product type as that on the Certificate of Authenticity label that came with the PC."

also:

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/resources/volbr ief.mspx

"Operating System License Requirements: Initial Operating System and Transfer of License

Customers must first have a full desktop operating system installed on their machine before they are eligible to acquire an upgrade license for the Microsoft Windows desktop operating system via Microsoft's volume licensing programs. Customers cannot acquire full Microsoft Windows desktop operating system licenses through Microsoft Volume Licensing programs, only upgrade licenses."

Check out the My Life Bits project.

From the description: "MyLifeBits is a lifetime store of everything. It is the fulfillment of Vannevar Bush's 1945 Memex vision including full-text search, text & audio annotations, and hyperlinks. There are two parts to MyLifeBits: an experiment in lifetime storage, and a software research effort."

Too bad it doesn't seem to be publicly available at all, let alone for Mac OS X or Linux.

If you ever read the volume license agreement, its an upgrade to your existing windows license. Basically you should already have a license for the PC you are installing the volume licensing version on. You more pay for the connection access license (CAL) and various other 'use' licenses per user.

From Microsoft's Website

Only Windows Client upgrades can be acquired through Volume Licensing; the full operating system license must be acquired as FPP or be pre-installed by an OEM or System Builder.

Its under Licensing Basics but also comes with your VLA and sometimes as a reminder in your VL Software Packs.

Microsoft ASP.NET version 2 also fights cross-site request forgeries with a MAC'ed token:
ViewState, ViewStateUserKey, andother ASP.NET security-related features

To save you futile Googling, be aware that Microsoft refers to cross-site request forgery as "one-click attacks".

Don't underestimate how important this attack is. To quote The PHP Consultancy, The most challenging characteristic of CSRF attacks is that the legitimate user is essentially making the request. Thus, regardless of how perfect the user identification and/or session management mechanism is, a CSRF attack can still be successful."

Actually, it is in C#.

http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity/

ProClarity has worked with Microsoft as a partner up until now to help them optimize SQL Server.

ProClarity has worked with Microsoft as a partner up until now to help them optimize SQL Server.

Interesting but come on. Apple does not have the tools to do enterprise deployments. Of course neither did this specific government branch either but that is not the fault of MS because there are solutions avilable. Before you call me a troll, listen to what I am refering too.

MS and third party vendors have solutions to make an upgrade or deployment or redeployment of hundreds and thousnads of machines from start to finish without a single support person having to visit a single desk, this includes MS and third party applications as well. Of course they have tools that allow small technician participation and medium technician participation as well. The choice is yours depending on your risk assessment, comfort with the given tools, and the touchyness of your end users. Basically, you put more effort on the engineering end and save time, money and problems on the front line.

You can upgrade any machine from 2000-->XP, XPSP1-->XPSP2, or a blank HD to your customized version of XPSP2 with all the applications your company uses. You can maintain all of the users prefrences like MS sensitivity, background color, desktop items, the order they few messages in Outlook (oldest at the top or bottom etc), the exact toolbars and placement of those toolbars in MS Word, your specific applications settings, drive mappings, specific printers, time zones, and dialout settings. Third party applications as well if they have some type of MSI, ini, or registry settings.

Imagine getting 200 new machines from Dell and the next day, they are all up and running with the specific apps and settings they need and other then the physical work to actually unbox them and place them throughout the office and plug them in, it took 2 people 8 hours to get them up and running complete with all or required applications and specific settings. How about a week later, you upgrade 3 applications and apply 3 service packs to those al of the workstations in your office with a little pretesting and then pushing it to all machines. It may take one person 1 hour to do that. How about 50 people get jammed with spyware? It takes one person to run some scripts to get those machines completely reloaded with a fresh base image with required applications, and they retain all of thier previous settings that I mentioned above.

It can happen and does happen. Don't blame MS when the tools are available, blame the IT department for not blocking and having an efficient plan for recovery. Let me know how any of that goes with your 300 mini Macs.

Believe me, I about as far as I can get from an MS fan. I do have to do it for a living though and I know what tools they have and how to use them to make our life easier. The tools and framework are there. Wether you or your IT department decide to use them is your own call.

Here are some links for further information on different deployment methods.
Pain Free Deployment
Windows PE
Zero Touch Installation Deployment Feature Team Guide

Interesting but come on. Apple does not have the tools to do enterprise deployments. Of course neither did this specific government branch either but that is not the fault of MS because there are solutions avilable. Before you call me a troll, listen to what I am refering too.

MS and third party vendors have solutions to make an upgrade or deployment or redeployment of hundreds and thousnads of machines from start to finish without a single support person having to visit a single desk, this includes MS and third party applications as well. Of course they have tools that allow small technician participation and medium technician participation as well. The choice is yours depending on your risk assessment, comfort with the given tools, and the touchyness of your end users. Basically, you put more effort on the engineering end and save time, money and problems on the front line.

You can upgrade any machine from 2000-->XP, XPSP1-->XPSP2, or a blank HD to your customized version of XPSP2 with all the applications your company uses. You can maintain all of the users prefrences like MS sensitivity, background color, desktop items, the order they few messages in Outlook (oldest at the top or bottom etc), the exact toolbars and placement of those toolbars in MS Word, your specific applications settings, drive mappings, specific printers, time zones, and dialout settings. Third party applications as well if they have some type of MSI, ini, or registry settings.

Imagine getting 200 new machines from Dell and the next day, they are all up and running with the specific apps and settings they need and other then the physical work to actually unbox them and place them throughout the office and plug them in, it took 2 people 8 hours to get them up and running complete with all or required applications and specific settings. How about a week later, you upgrade 3 applications and apply 3 service packs to those al of the workstations in your office with a little pretesting and then pushing it to all machines. It may take one person 1 hour to do that. How about 50 people get jammed with spyware? It takes one person to run some scripts to get those machines completely reloaded with a fresh base image with required applications, and they retain all of thier previous settings that I mentioned above.

It can happen and does happen. Don't blame MS when the tools are available, blame the IT department for not blocking and having an efficient plan for recovery. Let me know how any of that goes with your 300 mini Macs.

Believe me, I about as far as I can get from an MS fan. I do have to do it for a living though and I know what tools they have and how to use them to make our life easier. The tools and framework are there. Wether you or your IT department decide to use them is your own call.

Here are some links for further information on different deployment methods.
Pain Free Deployment
Windows PE
Zero Touch Installation Deployment Feature Team Guide

Interesting but come on. Apple does not have the tools to do enterprise deployments. Of course neither did this specific government branch either but that is not the fault of MS because there are solutions avilable. Before you call me a troll, listen to what I am refering too.

MS and third party vendors have solutions to make an upgrade or deployment or redeployment of hundreds and thousnads of machines from start to finish without a single support person having to visit a single desk, this includes MS and third party applications as well. Of course they have tools that allow small technician participation and medium technician participation as well. The choice is yours depending on your risk assessment, comfort with the given tools, and the touchyness of your end users. Basically, you put more effort on the engineering end and save time, money and problems on the front line.

You can upgrade any machine from 2000-->XP, XPSP1-->XPSP2, or a blank HD to your customized version of XPSP2 with all the applications your company uses. You can maintain all of the users prefrences like MS sensitivity, background color, desktop items, the order they few messages in Outlook (oldest at the top or bottom etc), the exact toolbars and placement of those toolbars in MS Word, your specific applications settings, drive mappings, specific printers, time zones, and dialout settings. Third party applications as well if they have some type of MSI, ini, or registry settings.

Imagine getting 200 new machines from Dell and the next day, they are all up and running with the specific apps and settings they need and other then the physical work to actually unbox them and place them throughout the office and plug them in, it took 2 people 8 hours to get them up and running complete with all or required applications and specific settings. How about a week later, you upgrade 3 applications and apply 3 service packs to those al of the workstations in your office with a little pretesting and then pushing it to all machines. It may take one person 1 hour to do that. How about 50 people get jammed with spyware? It takes one person to run some scripts to get those machines completely reloaded with a fresh base image with required applications, and they retain all of thier previous settings that I mentioned above.

It can happen and does happen. Don't blame MS when the tools are available, blame the IT department for not blocking and having an efficient plan for recovery. Let me know how any of that goes with your 300 mini Macs.

Believe me, I about as far as I can get from an MS fan. I do have to do it for a living though and I know what tools they have and how to use them to make our life easier. The tools and framework are there. Wether you or your IT department decide to use them is your own call.

Here are some links for further information on different deployment methods.
Pain Free Deployment
Windows PE
Zero Touch Installation Deployment Feature Team Guide

Microsoft 2001 -

Microsoft Puts Spotlight on Security Leadership at RSA Conference 2001
Company Delivers on Promises; Keynote Details Commitment and New Product Security Features

"In an increasingly interconnected world, Microsoft is delivering the products, technologies and services that empower safe, secure and trustworthy computing for customers," Thompson said. "Today's announcements illustrate Microsoft's continuing commitment to keeping our customers' information safe and secure."

Thompson characterized the upcoming releases of new security features in products across the Windows family -- including Windows XP and the next version of the Windows Server product, code-named "Whistler" -- as part of the company's "declaration of war on hostile code."

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2001/Apr0 1/04-10ThompsonPR.mspx

Microsoft 2006 -

"When you are dealing with rootkits and some advanced spyware programs, the only solution is to rebuild from scratch. In some cases, there really is no way to recover without nuking the systems from orbit," Mike Danseglio, program manager in the Security Solutions group at Microsoft, said in a presentation at the InfoSec World conference here.

Microsoft 2011 -

Microsoft continues to be your partner on the front lines in this dire struggle against cyber terrorism. To that end, we take great pleasure today in announcing our newest release of Windows, code-named "Schroedinger." Its new non-deterministic processing engine replaces much of the problematic code found in older versions of Windows such as Vista providing an unheard of and here-to-fore unprecedented level of security for enterprise, small business and home users.

If you take anything that Google's done (Search, Maps, News, Email, IM), they've taken what others have done it and tried perfecting it. A much better idea than finding new niche markets.

"A Mac-user with common sense!"

It's not common sense. It's wrong.

Microsoft is in a unique position. Because it has a virtual monopoly, Microsoft makes more money when its software has a lot of security vulnerabilities. For those who are ruled by money, morality has no force; "Maximizing Shareholder Value" is the way they live their lives.

Microsoft makes more money if it pressures its programmers to work too fast, so that they are sloppy, and then releases buggy software. Many people are fascinated by computers, and easily accept the world that Microsoft has created for them.

Here's a story about a Microsoft VP saying, "Oh, the next Windows operating system will be secure": "Safety and security is the overriding feature that most people will want to have Windows Vista for" .

So, Microsoft is once again telling us "The next version of Windows will be the good one." Before, Microsoft said Windows XP was "Built to be Dependable".

However, Vista will NOT include virus protection. Jim Allchin, co-president of Microsoft's platform products and services division told CRN, an industry magazine this:

CRN: In terms of security, how do you compare security in Vista vs. security in Windows XP SP2?

Allchin: SP2 was a very good system but compared to Vista, it's night and day.

CRN: Is there going to be antivirus in Vista?

Allchin: No, there is not.

CRN: Why?

Allchin: It's a complicated answer as to why not.

CRN: Was the decision based on technical concerns?

Allchin: It wasn't technical.

CRN: Will Vista resolve security problems once and for all?

Allchin: I'm not going to claim perfection or near perfection, but I think we're unrivaled in the work we've done. I believe security will be a huge problem for the industry for years and years and years but this will change the landscape in a fairly dramatic way.

Once again, Microsoft is taking advantage of the fact that most of its customers have little technical knowledge. Mr. Allchin said that "security will be a huge problem for the industry for years and years and years".

Microsoft charges for OneCare Live. That's another way to make money. Make sloppy software, and then sell protection against the sloppiness.

Note the emphasis on "beta testing" in Mr. Allchin's statements in the CRN interview. Someone said that Microsoft's motto is "The whole world is our beta tester."

--
Before, Saddam got Iraq oil profits and paid part to kill Iraqis. Now a few Americans get Iraq oil profits, and American citizens pay to kill Iraqis. Improvement?

I haven't used Apple Remote Desktop, but Windows has a great Remote Desktop tool: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/mobility/ getstarted/remoteintro.mspx

So, on 2 CPUs, you are running four copies of MS Server and two installationf of MS SQL sevrer. How many licenses must you buy? Four for Win2k3, 2 for MS SQL.

They're giving away the OS licenses too...

"Better virtualization value. Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition provides better value in server virtualization. Licensing policy changes now allow customers to run up to 4 virtual instances of Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise Edition on one licensed physical server or hardware partition."

Wrong. Microsoft did not offer any support to paying customers who installed Linux under Virtual Server. Now they provide support if you run Linux from either Red Hat or Novell. Furthermore, the press releasealso has a link to the Linux tools necessary for smooth video and mouse movement. It helps to read a little before commenting.

Wrong. Microsoft did not offer any support to paying customers who installed Linux under Virtual Server. Now they provide support if you run Linux from either Red Hat or Novell. Furthermore, the press releasealso has a link to the Linux tools necessary for smooth video and mouse movement. It helps to read a little before commenting.

Wrong. Microsoft did not offer any support to paying customers who installed Linux under Virtual Server. Now they provide support if you run Linux from either Red Hat or Novell. Furthermore, the press releasealso has a link to the Linux tools necessary for smooth video and mouse movement. It helps to read a little before commenting.

Must better coverage over at this blog. Check out VMWare President Diane Greene's blog.

And here is direct link to the Microsoft download page that requires registration.

Direct link to the 32bit version: here. (no reg required)

Direct link to the 64bit version: here. (no reg required)

Happy downloading.

Must better coverage over at this blog. Check out VMWare President Diane Greene's blog.

And here is direct link to the Microsoft download page that requires registration.

Direct link to the 32bit version: here. (no reg required)

Direct link to the 64bit version: here. (no reg required)

Happy downloading.

Must better coverage over at this blog. Check out VMWare President Diane Greene's blog.

And here is direct link to the Microsoft download page that requires registration.

Direct link to the 32bit version: here. (no reg required)

Direct link to the 64bit version: here. (no reg required)

Happy downloading.

Of course, Microsoft and IBM have had researchers and, indeed, research groups studying social computing since the mid-1990s.

• Microsoft Research Social Computing Group (formerly Virtual Worlds Group)
• Microsoft Research Collaborative and Multimedia Systems Group
• Microsoft Research Community Technologies Group (a more recent creation)
• IBM Research Social Computing Group

They've known for at least a decade that these were important areas to study. TFA should know better.

Of course, Microsoft and IBM have had researchers and, indeed, research groups studying social computing since the mid-1990s.

• Microsoft Research Social Computing Group (formerly Virtual Worlds Group)
• Microsoft Research Collaborative and Multimedia Systems Group
• Microsoft Research Community Technologies Group (a more recent creation)
• IBM Research Social Computing Group

They've known for at least a decade that these were important areas to study. TFA should know better.

Of course, Microsoft and IBM have had researchers and, indeed, research groups studying social computing since the mid-1990s.

• Microsoft Research Social Computing Group (formerly Virtual Worlds Group)
• Microsoft Research Collaborative and Multimedia Systems Group
• Microsoft Research Community Technologies Group (a more recent creation)
• IBM Research Social Computing Group

They've known for at least a decade that these were important areas to study. TFA should know better.

How would Balmer and Gates have "gotten them back"?

Buy them. If you have a company with a small number of owners (Microsoft didn't IPO until 1986), you don't want to have 36% of the voting rights suddenly go to someone that knows nothing about the company (or technology in general) -- they could wreck the place. It's pretty common for companies to have rules spelled out for handling such situations (e.g. terms for other owners to buy out) when a key person leaves/dies. Cringely seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill (and I'm not a MS fanboy).

Hype?