Slashdot Mirror

Word 2003 crashes or hangs while saving:
http://www.proz.com/forum/office_applications/58778-word_crashes_while_saving_a_document_help.html
http://www.pcreview.co.uk/forums/word-2003-freezes-and-crashes-try-save-file-t2502351.html
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2003-word/word-2003-hangs-when-saving-file/1d6be026-5086-4408-8b2a-3296f9f161eb

Word 2007 crashes or hangs while saving:
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2007-word/ms-word-2007-crashes-every-time-when-saving-help/0ecd87eb-3822-4bc1-bf36-cb1d2825d082?msgId=84934bdc-1347-4e57-8348-00a317af48fa
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproappcompat/thread/3d2a65b1-10b5-4f02-a12f-dfbe06233f87
http://www.ruthellison.com/2008/03/fixing-microsoft-word-2007-crashing-feature/

Word 2010 crashes or hangs while saving:
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2010-word/word-2010-crashes-when-saving-docx/d4bb1c00-8b9a-4e50-ba84-ea74cc24b5f7
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/officesetupdeployprevious/thread/7c00370c-02d2-46e4-ad40-08c02dcf0f09/
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/office/forum/office_2010-word/word-2010-freezes-and-crashes-while-saving/91df4a3a-3e7f-45ef-90ca-b604c9644d86

Ugh, they aren't even in the same ballpark. Microsoft use their cloud server infrastructure for all sorts of things.

THIS is the difference between a shitty cheapskate gaming company that mistreats their employees and a legitimate enterprise vendor.

EA provisioned literally *dozens* of servers for Simcity 5. MSFT is provisioning 300,000 servers out of countless servers operating the Azure network.

Ugh, they aren't even in the same ballpark. Microsoft use their cloud server infrastructure for all sorts of things.

THIS is the difference between a shitty cheapskate gaming company that mistreats their employees and a legitimate enterprise vendor.

EA provisioned literally *dozens* of servers for Simcity 5. MSFT is provisioning 300,000 servers out of countless servers operating the Azure network.

Ugh, they aren't even in the same ballpark. Microsoft use their cloud server infrastructure for all sorts of things.

THIS is the difference between a shitty cheapskate gaming company that mistreats their employees and a legitimate enterprise vendor.

EA provisioned literally *dozens* of servers for Simcity 5. MSFT is provisioning 300,000 servers out of countless servers operating the Azure network.

On Windows check out SteamService.exe (aka the Steam Client Service), it should be in your services list.

That's a Microsoft recommended practice for bypassing UAC prompts when doing administration tasks like installing and updating software.

You may have noticed that Steam doesn't UAC when you install games, that service is why. You can disable the service and Steam will still work just fine. You'll just be bombarded with UAC prompts to do game updates and installs instead. Enjoy.

You posted so fast, with such insightful prose. I wish I was you, because you are awesome!

When you get first post that survives moderation, usually it means you control the majority of the discussion. I hope it works, because Microsoft is teh bestorz! I really want in on this, why should the rest of us post for free? We want to be paid for our first posts too. I need to get me some of that software Microsoft is supplying you and your friends so I can achieve Most Outstanding Wise First Post achievement.

Tell me, when you create an account, how many times do you use it? What are the guidelines? Post once, and on to the next account? I really think it's unfair of you and your friends to not cut us in on the action.

If you want to edit or create videos, there's no better software than Windows Movie Maker. Create real or faked videos - it's all possible.

---

To address the *actual* topic at hand, the problem as I see it, is that the video doesn't (and probably couldn't) "prove" what Coach Ford was smoking in that pipe. My gut instinct is that it is him in the video, and his recorded words will do the most harm.

If you want to edit or create videos, there's no better software than Windows Movie Maker. Create real or faked videos - it's all possible.

C# Decimal type?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.decimal(v=vs.80).aspx

That said I believe the guptas wouldn't bother or understand.

for their own products maybe they would be more popular. At least this was somewhat creative, unlike their past Scroogled ads. Funny thing is that while Microsoft points the finger of shame at Google they are trying to do the same thing: http://advertising.microsoft.com/international/display-ad-targeting

You're absolutely right. That's why MS keeps boasting how they won't reach the customers because they wouldn't want a share of google's cake.

Oh, wait!

You do that.

Tell them to make a version of DBT_DEVICEARRIVAL that doesn't require you to have a window handle to get the callback to the message pump so that you don't have to poll using PeekMessage().

AddDevice routine is used by device drivers to be notified when their device arrives at the bus (e.g. an USB bus).

Insufficient. I don't WANT to have to install a damn device driver to handle a general class of devices. This is the Microsoft model, and it is flawed. I want to write a program in userspace which gets notified when devices arrive, and then it goes out and sniffs their butt to see if it's a device I can claim, and if it is, then I claim it by opening it as a raw USB device and handle the device specific communications protocols in userspace. This is the Mac OS X / Linux / BSD model.

The benefits of this model over the model Microsoft wants us to use is that it allows us to deal with classes of devices without writing a new driver for the device -- or in this case, since we want to start a user space program, a new service for the device.

Conceptually, I suppose it's possible to build a Rube-Goldberg contraption that would consist of a device driver that used the mechanism you suggest, a service in userspace to talk to the Rube-Goldberg contraption, and then launch the application based on it being a device it recognized. That just trades unknown GUIDs for unknown vendor IDs, if not both them and device IDs as well.

Then we are left with replicating the Microsoft USB class driver functionality in its entirety, since the device will have been claimed by our USB driver, and that is the driver our service and application will end up having to talk to.

The notifications need to be able to go to windowless services.

Yes, agree. But they can. It is right there in the documentation.

But now we are back in the same boat of having to install new software - it's just a device driver, instead of a service. Or we can access a vendor/device ID table from the registry - but again, this new table has to be installed for the device to be used.

Then tell them that RegisterDeviceNotification() is useless for detecting new iPod/iPhone/iPad devices because it require matching a GUID that has not been defined at the time that the service was written, and that having to update the service by having to update iTunes each time you buy a new device before the plugged in device is recognized as launching iTunes because you don't get a broadcast notification in that case, which you can then use to open up the device temporarily to probe it further ("Hi, USB device, are you an Apple Device?") rather than using a stinking GUID.

That's the thing with GUIDs: It is perfectly safe to choose them during *development*. Generating a guid for a device or an event virtually guarantees that no other device or event will use the same ID. The main problem with GUIDs is that such "well-known" guids needs to be documented. But if Apple writes the device driver that broadcasts the event, surely they can find a way to use the clipboard and use the same GUID during notification registration.

This is the part that's insufficient about GUIDs: if I have a per-device GUID during device development, then I have to put it in the table somewhere, and that's an installation step before I can use the new device.

Then you can call up Motorola, and tell them so they can update their PhoneTools Software, because they have the same problem.

I wasn't aware that they are eating CPU like iTunes. Citation?

iTunes is a pig when it polls, no question; PhoneTools and other software is less of a pig, but the main complaint of the OP was that it'

You do that.

Tell them to make a version of DBT_DEVICEARRIVAL that doesn't require you to have a window handle to get the callback to the message pump so that you don't have to poll using PeekMessage().

AddDevice routine is used by device drivers to be notified when their device arrives at the bus (e.g. an USB bus).

But if you read the documentation for the RegisterDeviceNotification function carefully, you should notice this:

Services can use the RegisterDeviceNotification function to register to receive device notifications. If a service specifies a window handle in the hRecipient parameter, the notifications are sent to the window procedure. If hRecipient is a service status handle, SERVICE_CONTROL_DEVICEEVENT notifications are sent to the service control handler. For more information about the service control handler, see HandlerEx.

Really!

The notifications need to be able to go to windowless services.

Yes, agree. But they can. It is right there in the documentation.

Then tell them that RegisterDeviceNotification() is useless for detecting new iPod/iPhone/iPad devices because it require matching a GUID that has not been defined at the time that the service was written, and that having to update the service by having to update iTunes each time you buy a new device before the plugged in device is recognized as launching iTunes because you don't get a broadcast notification in that case, which you can then use to open up the device temporarily to probe it further ("Hi, USB device, are you an Apple Device?") rather than using a stinking GUID.

That's the thing with GUIDs: It is perfectly safe to choose them during *development*. Generating a guid for a device or an event virtually guarantees that no other device or event will use the same ID. The main problem with GUIDs is that such "well-known" guids needs to be documented. But if Apple writes the device driver that broadcasts the event, surely they can find a way to use the clipboard and use the same GUID during notification registration.

Then you can call up Motorola, and tell them so they can update their PhoneTools Software, because they have the same problem.

I wasn't aware that they are eating CPU like iTunes. Citation?

... the DataPilot folks, who have no idea in heck what the phone GUID would be when you plug in your stupid random phone, particularly if you are using their DataPilot Universal PRO Kit, which connect up to almost all the phones from Apple, Motorola, LG, Samsung, Sanyo,
Sony Ericsson, and Audiovox.

I have more concrete examples, but I think you get the point.

not really, no. Do they eat CPU cycles polling like the crApple software?

The current Microsoft APIs do not solve this general problem; they require either an open application window, or they require a service which polls.

Wrong. Read the documentation. I linked to it and quoted it above. It really is not that difficult.

You do that.

Tell them to make a version of DBT_DEVICEARRIVAL that doesn't require you to have a window handle to get the callback to the message pump so that you don't have to poll using PeekMessage().

AddDevice routine is used by device drivers to be notified when their device arrives at the bus (e.g. an USB bus).

But if you read the documentation for the RegisterDeviceNotification function carefully, you should notice this:

Services can use the RegisterDeviceNotification function to register to receive device notifications. If a service specifies a window handle in the hRecipient parameter, the notifications are sent to the window procedure. If hRecipient is a service status handle, SERVICE_CONTROL_DEVICEEVENT notifications are sent to the service control handler. For more information about the service control handler, see HandlerEx.

Really!

The notifications need to be able to go to windowless services.

Yes, agree. But they can. It is right there in the documentation.

Then tell them that RegisterDeviceNotification() is useless for detecting new iPod/iPhone/iPad devices because it require matching a GUID that has not been defined at the time that the service was written, and that having to update the service by having to update iTunes each time you buy a new device before the plugged in device is recognized as launching iTunes because you don't get a broadcast notification in that case, which you can then use to open up the device temporarily to probe it further ("Hi, USB device, are you an Apple Device?") rather than using a stinking GUID.

That's the thing with GUIDs: It is perfectly safe to choose them during *development*. Generating a guid for a device or an event virtually guarantees that no other device or event will use the same ID. The main problem with GUIDs is that such "well-known" guids needs to be documented. But if Apple writes the device driver that broadcasts the event, surely they can find a way to use the clipboard and use the same GUID during notification registration.

Then you can call up Motorola, and tell them so they can update their PhoneTools Software, because they have the same problem.

I wasn't aware that they are eating CPU like iTunes. Citation?

... the DataPilot folks, who have no idea in heck what the phone GUID would be when you plug in your stupid random phone, particularly if you are using their DataPilot Universal PRO Kit, which connect up to almost all the phones from Apple, Motorola, LG, Samsung, Sanyo,
Sony Ericsson, and Audiovox.

I have more concrete examples, but I think you get the point.

not really, no. Do they eat CPU cycles polling like the crApple software?

The current Microsoft APIs do not solve this general problem; they require either an open application window, or they require a service which polls.

Wrong. Read the documentation. I linked to it and quoted it above. It really is not that difficult.

MSE says this bugger is present on the site: http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/threat/encyclopedia/entry.aspx?name=Trojan%3AJS%2FIframeRef.K&threatid=2147679863

You still have not told us where Microsoft recommends polling, as per your claim:

And worse? Some of the documentation specifically says they want it that way! On purpose!

[HAL] it's a nightmare of convoluted and badly-documented objects and methods. I won't go as far as to say whoever decided to go with polling instead of event-driven made a great design choice, but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

Windows device driver development has an entire site devoted to it. In there there is architectural guides, tools, development kits, samples, articles, process guidelines and best-practices. I really don't know what you'd expect? Would the source code be better documentation and provide better guidance?

but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

I can't

1. iPhone connects over USB. Which means that Windows already has a bus driver in place which will notity the PnP manager about device arrivals on the USB bus. What one would need to create is probably a Function Driver. If iPhone used some standard protocol one could probably do with a built-in driver, but I suspect that some proprietary protocol are at work - so therefore a function driver.

2. The PnP manager will activate and notify the function driver upon device arrival. It will do so through the AddDevice message.

3. From the looks of it, what the iPhone requires is probably aptly covered by a user mode driver. Which flies in the face of your previous assertion that

Microsoft's hardware abstraction layer is a terrible, horrible, implimentation that makes every access from userspace terribly expensive

What exactly is it you feel is not documented? What is the documentation you are missing? You did download the Windows Driver Kit, right?

Still waiting for citation for Microsoft recommendation of polling...

You still have not told us where Microsoft recommends polling, as per your claim:

And worse? Some of the documentation specifically says they want it that way! On purpose!

[HAL] it's a nightmare of convoluted and badly-documented objects and methods. I won't go as far as to say whoever decided to go with polling instead of event-driven made a great design choice, but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

Windows device driver development has an entire site devoted to it. In there there is architectural guides, tools, development kits, samples, articles, process guidelines and best-practices. I really don't know what you'd expect? Would the source code be better documentation and provide better guidance?

but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

I can't

1. iPhone connects over USB. Which means that Windows already has a bus driver in place which will notity the PnP manager about device arrivals on the USB bus. What one would need to create is probably a Function Driver. If iPhone used some standard protocol one could probably do with a built-in driver, but I suspect that some proprietary protocol are at work - so therefore a function driver.

2. The PnP manager will activate and notify the function driver upon device arrival. It will do so through the AddDevice message.

3. From the looks of it, what the iPhone requires is probably aptly covered by a user mode driver. Which flies in the face of your previous assertion that

Microsoft's hardware abstraction layer is a terrible, horrible, implimentation that makes every access from userspace terribly expensive

What exactly is it you feel is not documented? What is the documentation you are missing? You did download the Windows Driver Kit, right?

Still waiting for citation for Microsoft recommendation of polling...

You still have not told us where Microsoft recommends polling, as per your claim:

And worse? Some of the documentation specifically says they want it that way! On purpose!

[HAL] it's a nightmare of convoluted and badly-documented objects and methods. I won't go as far as to say whoever decided to go with polling instead of event-driven made a great design choice, but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

Windows device driver development has an entire site devoted to it. In there there is architectural guides, tools, development kits, samples, articles, process guidelines and best-practices. I really don't know what you'd expect? Would the source code be better documentation and provide better guidance?

but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

I can't

1. iPhone connects over USB. Which means that Windows already has a bus driver in place which will notity the PnP manager about device arrivals on the USB bus. What one would need to create is probably a Function Driver. If iPhone used some standard protocol one could probably do with a built-in driver, but I suspect that some proprietary protocol are at work - so therefore a function driver.

2. The PnP manager will activate and notify the function driver upon device arrival. It will do so through the AddDevice message.

3. From the looks of it, what the iPhone requires is probably aptly covered by a user mode driver. Which flies in the face of your previous assertion that

Microsoft's hardware abstraction layer is a terrible, horrible, implimentation that makes every access from userspace terribly expensive

What exactly is it you feel is not documented? What is the documentation you are missing? You did download the Windows Driver Kit, right?

Still waiting for citation for Microsoft recommendation of polling...

You still have not told us where Microsoft recommends polling, as per your claim:

And worse? Some of the documentation specifically says they want it that way! On purpose!

[HAL] it's a nightmare of convoluted and badly-documented objects and methods. I won't go as far as to say whoever decided to go with polling instead of event-driven made a great design choice, but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

Windows device driver development has an entire site devoted to it. In there there is architectural guides, tools, development kits, samples, articles, process guidelines and best-practices. I really don't know what you'd expect? Would the source code be better documentation and provide better guidance?

but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

I can't

1. iPhone connects over USB. Which means that Windows already has a bus driver in place which will notity the PnP manager about device arrivals on the USB bus. What one would need to create is probably a Function Driver. If iPhone used some standard protocol one could probably do with a built-in driver, but I suspect that some proprietary protocol are at work - so therefore a function driver.

2. The PnP manager will activate and notify the function driver upon device arrival. It will do so through the AddDevice message.

3. From the looks of it, what the iPhone requires is probably aptly covered by a user mode driver. Which flies in the face of your previous assertion that

Microsoft's hardware abstraction layer is a terrible, horrible, implimentation that makes every access from userspace terribly expensive

What exactly is it you feel is not documented? What is the documentation you are missing? You did download the Windows Driver Kit, right?

Still waiting for citation for Microsoft recommendation of polling...

You still have not told us where Microsoft recommends polling, as per your claim:

And worse? Some of the documentation specifically says they want it that way! On purpose!

[HAL] it's a nightmare of convoluted and badly-documented objects and methods. I won't go as far as to say whoever decided to go with polling instead of event-driven made a great design choice, but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

Windows device driver development has an entire site devoted to it. In there there is architectural guides, tools, development kits, samples, articles, process guidelines and best-practices. I really don't know what you'd expect? Would the source code be better documentation and provide better guidance?

but I can understand how, after days and days of pouring over bad documentation, he decided it was either ritualistic suicide or go with the better-documented interface...

I can't

1. iPhone connects over USB. Which means that Windows already has a bus driver in place which will notity the PnP manager about device arrivals on the USB bus. What one would need to create is probably a Function Driver. If iPhone used some standard protocol one could probably do with a built-in driver, but I suspect that some proprietary protocol are at work - so therefore a function driver.

2. The PnP manager will activate and notify the function driver upon device arrival. It will do so through the AddDevice message.

3. From the looks of it, what the iPhone requires is probably aptly covered by a user mode driver. Which flies in the face of your previous assertion that

Microsoft's hardware abstraction layer is a terrible, horrible, implimentation that makes every access from userspace terribly expensive

What exactly is it you feel is not documented? What is the documentation you are missing? You did download the Windows Driver Kit, right?

Still waiting for citation for Microsoft recommendation of polling...

But on the flip, Microsoft's hardware abstraction layer is a terrible, horrible, implimentation that makes every access from userspace terribly expensive.

And worse? Some of the documentation specifically says they want it that way! On purpose!

Citation needed.

Windows actually has a rather sophisticated driver model which allows many drivers to be implemented in user mode or at least be divided so that big parts can run in user mode. This improves both stability and security. A relevant type of drivers in this context is bus drivers, specifically bus drivers for USB. These drivers will discover new devices on the USB bus *regardless* of their make, capability etc. The bus driver til inform *your* driver when a device arrives. No need to scan or poll for devices. If you do it right you can just sit there and wait to be informed. No need to poll, no need to even tie up a thread in waiting state.

That is all in the documentation:

Types of WDM Drivers
Function drivers
An example

So which part of the documentation did you read?

Everytime I have to work with HAL I'm filled with a strong urge to strip all my clothes off, burn them, then take a cold shower while shivering up in the corner, scrubbing my skin raw, chanting "must...wash...away...the sin..."

Maybe you should find another line of work?

But on the flip, Microsoft's hardware abstraction layer is a terrible, horrible, implimentation that makes every access from userspace terribly expensive.

And worse? Some of the documentation specifically says they want it that way! On purpose!

Citation needed.

Windows actually has a rather sophisticated driver model which allows many drivers to be implemented in user mode or at least be divided so that big parts can run in user mode. This improves both stability and security. A relevant type of drivers in this context is bus drivers, specifically bus drivers for USB. These drivers will discover new devices on the USB bus *regardless* of their make, capability etc. The bus driver til inform *your* driver when a device arrives. No need to scan or poll for devices. If you do it right you can just sit there and wait to be informed. No need to poll, no need to even tie up a thread in waiting state.

That is all in the documentation:

Types of WDM Drivers
Function drivers
An example

So which part of the documentation did you read?

Everytime I have to work with HAL I'm filled with a strong urge to strip all my clothes off, burn them, then take a cold shower while shivering up in the corner, scrubbing my skin raw, chanting "must...wash...away...the sin..."

Maybe you should find another line of work?

But on the flip, Microsoft's hardware abstraction layer is a terrible, horrible, implimentation that makes every access from userspace terribly expensive.

And worse? Some of the documentation specifically says they want it that way! On purpose!

Citation needed.

Windows actually has a rather sophisticated driver model which allows many drivers to be implemented in user mode or at least be divided so that big parts can run in user mode. This improves both stability and security. A relevant type of drivers in this context is bus drivers, specifically bus drivers for USB. These drivers will discover new devices on the USB bus *regardless* of their make, capability etc. The bus driver til inform *your* driver when a device arrives. No need to scan or poll for devices. If you do it right you can just sit there and wait to be informed. No need to poll, no need to even tie up a thread in waiting state.

That is all in the documentation:

Types of WDM Drivers
Function drivers
An example

So which part of the documentation did you read?

Everytime I have to work with HAL I'm filled with a strong urge to strip all my clothes off, burn them, then take a cold shower while shivering up in the corner, scrubbing my skin raw, chanting "must...wash...away...the sin..."

Maybe you should find another line of work?

Sysinternals(now part of Microsoft) has you covered.

Autoruns examines more or less all the legitimate mechanisms for starting programs and services and provides information on all entries, with the option to exclude MS-signed system components. You can also delete autorun entries from here, without grovelling around in all the various places that they can be stashed.

Process Explorer lets you observe what is actually running in greater detail than task manager.
 

Sysinternals(now part of Microsoft) has you covered.

Autoruns examines more or less all the legitimate mechanisms for starting programs and services and provides information on all entries, with the option to exclude MS-signed system components. You can also delete autorun entries from here, without grovelling around in all the various places that they can be stashed.

Process Explorer lets you observe what is actually running in greater detail than task manager.
 

To ensure that your program's functionality is easily available to the widest range of users, including those who have disabilities and impairments, all interactive user interface (UI) elements must be keyboard accessible. Generally, this means that the most commonly used UI elements are accessible using a single access key or key combination, whereas less frequently used elements may require additional tab or arrow key navigation. For these users, comprehensiveness is more important than consistency.

Microsoft also provides some nice face recognition software via their Windows Live Essentials package which does work on Windows. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-live/essentials-home The face recognition code stores all of its state in a couple of SQLLite databases which makes it very easy to hack and integrate despite the complete lack of documentation.

So instead of drawing a cartoon face yourself, which is something everyone can do and enjoys very much, Microsoft wants to automate this "task" away from you so you can do what? Have a good time with Excel instead?

It's just like the horror that is Microsoft Song Smith, where Microsoft wanted to automate the "tedious chore of composing music" by letting a computer generate tunes instead. It's just stupid. It has no application. It leads to nothing. I'm not against fundamental research or anything, but this sort of nonsense is really just wasting the time of everyone involved.

Microsoft Tax? EAS is royalty-free, license fee-free and has a patent covenant-not-to-sue so long as it's implemented correctly. Continuing to support it would have cost Google nothing other than the man hours to keep it working. There was no "Microsoft Tax".

lol wut? No it isn't.

"Microsoft licenses the patents for Exchange ActiveSync please contact us for more information."
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/IPLicensing/Programs/exchangeactivesyncprotocol.aspx

"Earlier today Google announced Google Sync, which is made possible by a patent license they obtained from Microsoft covering Google’s implementation of the Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync protocol on Google servers."
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2009/feb09/02-09statement.aspx

Did you even bother to search before you posted that? Or did you just feel like making up crap for giggles?

Microsoft Tax? EAS is royalty-free, license fee-free and has a patent covenant-not-to-sue so long as it's implemented correctly. Continuing to support it would have cost Google nothing other than the man hours to keep it working. There was no "Microsoft Tax".

lol wut? No it isn't.

"Microsoft licenses the patents for Exchange ActiveSync please contact us for more information."
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/IPLicensing/Programs/exchangeactivesyncprotocol.aspx

"Earlier today Google announced Google Sync, which is made possible by a patent license they obtained from Microsoft covering Google’s implementation of the Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync protocol on Google servers."
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2009/feb09/02-09statement.aspx

Did you even bother to search before you posted that? Or did you just feel like making up crap for giggles?

I don't know - Thunderbird and the Lightning calendar plugin do me just as well as Outlook and its inbuilt calendar does (better actually, since Outlook decided you didn't need to know what appointments you had coming up tomorrow something I found useful for early meetings)

Link the calendar with gmail calendar, and the email with gmail emails... you've got pretty much 100% of the functionality Outlook gives you. (without the flipping Facebook integration Outlook 2013 now shoves at you, or the integration with skydrive). I use it (when I can't be bothered to read my mail using my phone, which seems to be my default view of Gmail nowadays) and it just works.

If you need centralised user accounts, OpenLDAP does that, though its tricky to make that work with a bunch of Windows clients, it does work though its not out-of-the-box. This is how it should be, after all AD is just a fancy LDAP server anyway, but with a special Windows-only protocol that Microsoft had to hand over as part of their agreement with the EU (IIRC). Good to see the Samba team has finally waded through the walls MS must have put up and got samba 4 working as a full AD server.

I second this, and highly recommend sharepoint for all you collaboration and intranet purposes as well. As a developer, I can truly say how happy I am when I need to work on a Sharepoint site. Sharepoint even integrates with Outlook! Amazing integration with your existing Microsoft stack!

Outlook.com offers great features, is fully encrypted and offers everything a small (or larger) business needs. I can truly say how happy I am with their service. It also works great with your existing Microsoft stack.

SuperFetch and prefetch are storage management technologies in Windows that provide a fast-track access to data on traditional, slower hard drives. On SSD drives these really clever services only provide for unnecessary write operations. Typically, Windows 7 automatically disables these services for your SSD disk. Otherwise disable it manually.

Windows 8 behaves slightly differently, it doesn't automatically disable the service but the service does automatically ignore SSD drives but functions for HDD drives.

Have you even tried to find a Windows Phone? [...] I gave up.. I actually wanted to develop apps for it.. and it just became too much frustration

I suspect the "I actually wanted to develop for it" was a lie, too... given that they're so easy to find and the dev tools are free for it.

I was under the impression that it was like the iPhone, costing a recurring fee to be able to run programs that you wrote on a device that you own. This link claims that each "valid and current developer account on Windows Phone Dev Center [...] lets you register three devices for app development", and this link claims that a developer account costs $99 and self-destructs after 365 days.

Of course.

I used Cygwin the whole time I was at M$... And I used Interix/SFU/SUA or whatever they called it, after there was a whole Deb distro ported.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=274

http://debian-interix.net/

Looks like the Deb stopped updating in 2009. I would have been using it until 2010. It worked, with a XMingX server - which I preferred over CygwinX.
http://www.straightrunning.com/XmingNotes/

Anyone in the US could use Microsoft Windows Media ASF Viewer.

How about comparing like-with-like instead of new software with software from 10 years ago:
Ubuntu 12.04 (released 2012): 384MB minimum
Windows 7 (released 2009): 1GB minimum for 32-bit, 2GB for 64-bit
Windows 8 (released 2012): 1GB minimum for 32-bit, 2GB for 64-bit

Plus the minimum requirement for XP was 64MB, with 128MB recommended (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314865), not 32MB.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PrecisePangolin/ReleaseNotes/UbuntuDesktop#System_Requirements
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/system-requirements
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/system-requirements

How about comparing like-with-like instead of new software with software from 10 years ago:
Ubuntu 12.04 (released 2012): 384MB minimum
Windows 7 (released 2009): 1GB minimum for 32-bit, 2GB for 64-bit
Windows 8 (released 2012): 1GB minimum for 32-bit, 2GB for 64-bit

Plus the minimum requirement for XP was 64MB, with 128MB recommended (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314865), not 32MB.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PrecisePangolin/ReleaseNotes/UbuntuDesktop#System_Requirements
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/system-requirements
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/system-requirements

IMHO, this is something Windows gets right. It's a fucking executable dammit. Yeah, it calls some APIs that are needed for installing. Installation library, sure; but "packaging system"??? Package format? Sooner or later you'd think that Linux people would just wake up and realize it's an executable.

You'd better go tell Microsoft about that, they've apparently been running headlong away from 'getting it right' since 1999... While it doesn't have the concept of 'repositories' in the same sense that Linux package managers generally do, the Windows Installer Service and the .msi, .msp, and .mst files that it works with are easily as or more complex as anything on the Linux side(and that's in addition to the distinct Windows Update mechanism, which interacts either with Microsoft, with a WSUS server, or with .msu files, exactly what circumstances require this rather than WIS are not 100% clear to me).

Yes, Windows doesn't forbid much simpler mechanisms like the nullsoft installer or 'just click foo.exe'; but neither does linux. Plenty of non-packaged software comes as an 'install.sh' or just an executable binary you copy somewhere.

You're thinking of Surface RT. Surface PRO requires an x86 compatible processor, namely an Intel Core i5: http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-US/surface-with-windows-8-pro/specifications

It runs on Windows 7, although it's somewhat hard to install on x86_64:

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-windows_programs/windows-7-is-not-compatible-with-adobe-photoshop/6f1b4955-7166-4b8f-ad9b-5d19150f803f

Still not as hard as paying $50 per month to Adobe, though...

Actually, they should have included emulated XP in Windows 7

They did

with an upgrade to convert your existing XP install into a virtual machine

Doable, but the installer doesn't do it for you.

From the article:

Microsoft confirmed the remote code-execution vulnerability on Friday night. Versions 6, 7, 9, and 10 of the browser are immune to these attacks, so anyone who can upgrade to one of the latest two versions should do so immediately or switch to a different browser. For anyone who absolutely can not move away from IE 8, company researchers recommend the following precautions:

Helpfully, Microsoft has pulled that advisory. Going to http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/advisory/2847140 gets you a 404 error message now.

Thanks, Microsoft!

The page you linked to had a very helpful section for someone in your situation:

Buying a full version of Windows 8
If you want to build your own PC and install Windows 8 or Windows 8 Pro, or want an additional operating system running in either a local virtual machine or separate partition (including a Mac), you can buy the Windows 8 or Windows 8 Pro System Builder products (OEM versions). If available in your country or region, you can buy Windows 8 and Windows 8 Pro System Builder products at participating stores, but you'll need to ask a sales rep for more info. This version doesn't include customer support.

Source: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows-8/upgrade-to-windows-8#section_5

It's also interesting that you were "pushed to Linux" by the activation process of a product you claim you couldn't buy.

Ironically Activation on Microsoft platform pushed me to Linux

Windows 8 is not available to me from Microsoft only an upgrade I cannot use. From Microsoft http://windows.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/buy?ocid=GA8_O_WOL_Hero_ShopHP_FPP_Null the prices are $155 for a Windows 8 Upgrade or $295 for Windows 8 Pro. I could not find a version of retail Windows 8 anywhere. What is true for you is not true for me.

Microsoft said they would be doing this years ago (after people found ways to avoid paying MS Tax).

I wonder how much Microsoft Rent will be for Windows & Office.

You only have to ask:

Office 365 Home Premium

Office 365 Education

Office 365 Government

Microsoft Office 365 for Health Organizations

There are of, course, plans for the generic small and midsize business and the enterprise.

Office 365 has had a very successful launch: Microsoft: Office 365 Cloud Now $1 Billion Business

There are plausible FOSS alternatives for the stand-alone office suite (circa 1995). Competing with the office system which successfully which integrates on-line and off-line components and services is much tougher problem.

Microsoft said they would be doing this years ago (after people found ways to avoid paying MS Tax).

I wonder how much Microsoft Rent will be for Windows & Office.

You only have to ask:

Office 365 Home Premium

Office 365 Education

Office 365 Government

Microsoft Office 365 for Health Organizations

There are of, course, plans for the generic small and midsize business and the enterprise.

Office 365 has had a very successful launch: Microsoft: Office 365 Cloud Now $1 Billion Business

There are plausible FOSS alternatives for the stand-alone office suite (circa 1995). Competing with the office system which successfully which integrates on-line and off-line components and services is much tougher problem.

Microsoft said they would be doing this years ago (after people found ways to avoid paying MS Tax).

I wonder how much Microsoft Rent will be for Windows & Office.

You only have to ask:

Office 365 Home Premium

Office 365 Education

Office 365 Government

Microsoft Office 365 for Health Organizations

There are of, course, plans for the generic small and midsize business and the enterprise.

Office 365 has had a very successful launch: Microsoft: Office 365 Cloud Now $1 Billion Business

There are plausible FOSS alternatives for the stand-alone office suite (circa 1995). Competing with the office system which successfully which integrates on-line and off-line components and services is much tougher problem.

Microsoft said they would be doing this years ago (after people found ways to avoid paying MS Tax).

I wonder how much Microsoft Rent will be for Windows & Office.

You only have to ask:

Office 365 Home Premium

Office 365 Education

Office 365 Government

Microsoft Office 365 for Health Organizations

There are of, course, plans for the generic small and midsize business and the enterprise.

Office 365 has had a very successful launch: Microsoft: Office 365 Cloud Now $1 Billion Business

There are plausible FOSS alternatives for the stand-alone office suite (circa 1995). Competing with the office system which successfully which integrates on-line and off-line components and services is much tougher problem.

The whole site is built on Siebel E-Systems, an old CRM system, which generates the pages. Seibel is more or less defunct, having been acquired by Oracle.

The code is spectacularly version-specific. The error messages in Javascript code on the site indicate how tightly coupled this code is to very specific quirks of older software:

• "The script debugging feature is typically automatically enabled by Microsoft Visual Studio products. To improve performance of the Web browser for use with Siebel employee applications, it is recommended to disable script debugging in the Internet Explorer browser."
• "To fix this manually, in Internet Explorer menu, choose Tools > Internet Options > Security. Then choose the %1 security zone and click on Custom Level. Change %2 to %3."
• "To fix this manually, in Internet Explorer, choose Tools > Internet Options > Advanced Options. Clear the %1 check box."
• "Failed to retrieve Internet Explorer version from this machine."
• "There are some recommended settings not set correctly. You may experience functionality or performance problems. Are you sure you want to continue?"
• "This is required for use of Message bar, CTI toolbar, Workflow designer, Personalization business rules designer, Smartscript designer, Org-chart designer, Sales Pipeline Charts and Marketing campaign designer and other features."
• "Scripting is required in HI framework to manage data only interactions with the server and to interact with the browser DOM, ActiveX controls and Java Applets etc,. In addition, the HI framework also supports browser scripting for data validations etc,."
• "One or more settings fixed requires the browser to be restarted. Please exit the Siebel application, launch a new browser and try to login to the Siebel application again."
• "Please install Sun Java Runtime Environment version %s or higher. The correct Sun Java Runtime Environment can be downloaded from >. After the installation is completed, please configure Sun Java Runtime Environment version %s or higher as the default for your browser. This is performed in the Java Plug-in Control Panel. Please contact your administrator if you need assistance."
• "Q314312 or above is required for environments using Input Method Editors for eastern languages only, (example: Japanese) on Internet Explorer 5.5. Microsoft makes this patch and related information available through their support organization and/or the following link: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q314312.";
• "Internet Explorer 5.5 Service Pack 2 is a prerequisite for Siebel 7 HI applications running for Internet Explorer 5.5 Microsoft makes this software and related information available through their support organization for customers with extended support contracts and makes additional information available at the following download location: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;enus;Q303201&ID=303201.";
• "Internet Explorer 6.0 Service Pack 1 or above is a prerequisite for Siebel 7 HI applications running on Internet Explorer 6.0.Microsoft makes this patch and related information available through their support organization or the following download location: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/downloads/critical/ie6sp1/default.asp. The "Windows Update" feature may provide this and other valuable updates to your browser environment."
• "The registry entry workaround described in Q823099 is a prerequisite for Siebel 7 HI applications running against SunOne Web servers using Siebel Web Server compression on Internet Explorer. Microsoft makes the workaround instructions available through their support organization or the following location: