Slashdot Mirror

Geez, what do you think that lame tablet can do? Let's review what a real OS needs, from the Windows XP spec:

Pentium 233-megahertz (MHz) processor or faster (300 MHz is recommended)
At least 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM (128 MB is recommended)
At least 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available space on the hard disk
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM drive
Keyboard and a Microsoft Mouse or some other compatible pointing device
Video adapter and monitor with Super VGA (800 x 600)or higher resolution
Sound card
Speakers or headphones

Oh my, how ever is a 1600 MHz 4+1 core Tegra 3, 1GB RAM, 16GB SSD tablet ever going to get across that high bar?

Wow that's a thoughtful, complex post. Let's deal with these issues one at a time.

Para 1: Bill is gone. Bill Gates remains the chairman of the board at Microsoft, and hand-picked all the other board members - who pick the CEO and evaluate his performance, give him goals and guidance, set his pay, bonuses and options, and set policy. Bill is still very much responsible for what goes on there, and weighs in on every big decision.

Para 2: Steve Ballmer. You neglected to mention the sea of red ink that is Microsoft's Online Services Division. I happen to like the direction Steve Ballmer is taking Microsoft. Clearly this is a man with vision and purpose who is ready and able to take the company where I want it to go. It takes Marvel Comics level superpowers to get rid of this much cash flow, to destroy a 42 percent success in mobile market share from 2007 given their advantages and high hopes, to so capably destroy the morale and productivity of the world's best developers, to put a company with this much income in $55B of debt. So let's lay off of Steve-o, mmkay? I like him where he is, sweaty shirt and all.

Para 3: No more Big, Bad MS. With the OOXML debacle that nearly ruined ISO, their recent rape of Nokia, their current ongoing rape of OEMs, retail vendors of both their products and Windows PCs, their planned rape of software distributor partners, developers and competing independent software vendors and much much more they prove every day that they have not changed. Last week they confirmed they're going to murder the advertisers they bought relationships with in an acquisition by making "Do Not Track" the default in IE. Just yesterday it came out that the new replacement for Hotmail, Outlook.com is incompatible with Android. The "new kinder, gentler Microsoft" is a myth. They have now declared war on absolutely everybody on Earth, including the people who pay for their products and excepting only the Women's Temperance Union and media executives. Naturally this means I expect them to announce an embedded bittorent feature for IE that involves a drinking game next.

Para 4. Ballmer outbound. Steve Ballmer is not retiring for another seven years at least, when his last kid goes off to college.

Para 5. Immortal desktop victory. It's not enough to take ground. Once you take ground, you have to hold it. MS won mobile with 40% share too [link above], once upon a time. And now they'r

Please consider donating towards good software.
Classic shell has been 'fixing' broken stuff in Windows 7 for years, which Microsoft "experts" deem too difficult. (drive space free specifically)
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en/w7itproui/thread/c98ecee9-9d9a-463d-928d-30804c1f2d40

No, I am not affiliated with them, but swear by the app.
Also, surprisingly for something which attaches to explorer, never ever had a fault / crash from it.

There is no such thing as a "volume-key-enabled image" when it comes to Windows Vista, Windows 7, and Windows 8. The same applies to Windows 2003 Server and 2008 Server.

Microsoft did away with the the "volume-key" concept because with Windows XP and prior, people just began pirating the VLE ("Volume Licensed Edition") versions of Windows XP and prior, where you literally had a VLK (Volume Licensed Key) that worked as many times as possible on as many different machines as possible and never did/required activation[1].

You now have 3 choices: a per-PC license, a MAK, or a KMS. You can read about details here:

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/existing-customers/product-activation.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/existing-customers/product-activation-faq.aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd772269.aspx (seems to focus on Windows 8 but provides general concepts/methodologies which apply to existing Windows versions too)

TL;DR version: a MAK is a key that can be used on multiple PCs -- how many depends on how much you pay Microsoft (e.g. "I want a 25-system MAK") -- but still has to validate ("activate") with Microsoft. Windows can also use a KMS, which is literally a Windows 2008 (maybe 2003?) Server machine on your local network which decides whether or not machines on the LAN who are doing activation are permitted or rejected. Nobody knows much about how the KMS works behind the scenes, but it's almost certain that the KMS box talks to Microsoft periodically for licensing verification/validation. I also imagine a KMS costs a metric fuckton of money.

So please do not continue to proliferate the "volume key enabled" concept -- Microsoft destroyed that because they are excessively focused on anti-piracy measures. It's too bad they don't embrace reality and release their desktop OSes for free and instead charge for support, make money off Office and Server products, etc.; honestly this would be the best way they could compete with Linux and other open-source OSes w/out releasing the source.

[1]: Microsoft in the past 5-6 years has begun to crack down on some of the VLKs for Windows XP, blocking those keys. They do this through WGA (Windows Genuine Advantage); if they block your VLK, Windows Update and Microsoft Update will stop functioning and you're effectively fucked (e.g. no phone call to India will help you).

There is no such thing as a "volume-key-enabled image" when it comes to Windows Vista, Windows 7, and Windows 8. The same applies to Windows 2003 Server and 2008 Server.

Microsoft did away with the the "volume-key" concept because with Windows XP and prior, people just began pirating the VLE ("Volume Licensed Edition") versions of Windows XP and prior, where you literally had a VLK (Volume Licensed Key) that worked as many times as possible on as many different machines as possible and never did/required activation[1].

You now have 3 choices: a per-PC license, a MAK, or a KMS. You can read about details here:

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/existing-customers/product-activation.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/existing-customers/product-activation-faq.aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd772269.aspx (seems to focus on Windows 8 but provides general concepts/methodologies which apply to existing Windows versions too)

TL;DR version: a MAK is a key that can be used on multiple PCs -- how many depends on how much you pay Microsoft (e.g. "I want a 25-system MAK") -- but still has to validate ("activate") with Microsoft. Windows can also use a KMS, which is literally a Windows 2008 (maybe 2003?) Server machine on your local network which decides whether or not machines on the LAN who are doing activation are permitted or rejected. Nobody knows much about how the KMS works behind the scenes, but it's almost certain that the KMS box talks to Microsoft periodically for licensing verification/validation. I also imagine a KMS costs a metric fuckton of money.

So please do not continue to proliferate the "volume key enabled" concept -- Microsoft destroyed that because they are excessively focused on anti-piracy measures. It's too bad they don't embrace reality and release their desktop OSes for free and instead charge for support, make money off Office and Server products, etc.; honestly this would be the best way they could compete with Linux and other open-source OSes w/out releasing the source.

[1]: Microsoft in the past 5-6 years has begun to crack down on some of the VLKs for Windows XP, blocking those keys. They do this through WGA (Windows Genuine Advantage); if they block your VLK, Windows Update and Microsoft Update will stop functioning and you're effectively fucked (e.g. no phone call to India will help you).

There is no such thing as a "volume-key-enabled image" when it comes to Windows Vista, Windows 7, and Windows 8. The same applies to Windows 2003 Server and 2008 Server.

Microsoft did away with the the "volume-key" concept because with Windows XP and prior, people just began pirating the VLE ("Volume Licensed Edition") versions of Windows XP and prior, where you literally had a VLK (Volume Licensed Key) that worked as many times as possible on as many different machines as possible and never did/required activation[1].

You now have 3 choices: a per-PC license, a MAK, or a KMS. You can read about details here:

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/existing-customers/product-activation.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/existing-customers/product-activation-faq.aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd772269.aspx (seems to focus on Windows 8 but provides general concepts/methodologies which apply to existing Windows versions too)

TL;DR version: a MAK is a key that can be used on multiple PCs -- how many depends on how much you pay Microsoft (e.g. "I want a 25-system MAK") -- but still has to validate ("activate") with Microsoft. Windows can also use a KMS, which is literally a Windows 2008 (maybe 2003?) Server machine on your local network which decides whether or not machines on the LAN who are doing activation are permitted or rejected. Nobody knows much about how the KMS works behind the scenes, but it's almost certain that the KMS box talks to Microsoft periodically for licensing verification/validation. I also imagine a KMS costs a metric fuckton of money.

So please do not continue to proliferate the "volume key enabled" concept -- Microsoft destroyed that because they are excessively focused on anti-piracy measures. It's too bad they don't embrace reality and release their desktop OSes for free and instead charge for support, make money off Office and Server products, etc.; honestly this would be the best way they could compete with Linux and other open-source OSes w/out releasing the source.

[1]: Microsoft in the past 5-6 years has begun to crack down on some of the VLKs for Windows XP, blocking those keys. They do this through WGA (Windows Genuine Advantage); if they block your VLK, Windows Update and Microsoft Update will stop functioning and you're effectively fucked (e.g. no phone call to India will help you).

Mainstream support for Windows 7 ends in 2015.

I don't think there is a DVD/BD player shipped with Windows 7 either

Are you talking about the Starter or Home Premium edition of Windows 7? Because this page implies that Windows 7 Home Premium includes DVD playback software. And I thought BD-ROM drives (and PCs including one) included a BD player app, just as DVD-ROM drives (and PCs including one) included a DVD player app until Windows Vista Home Premium and Windows 7 Home Premium made DVD playback a standard Windows feature.

They could refuse to certify their hardware, which would likely cost them any discounts on licensing. They would not be able to use windows update to update drivers. See: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/hh924782

Windows could be changed in such a way as not to allow installation on uncertified hardware. Likely not insurmountable, but not trivial for the average user.

The tinfoil hat could be screwed on too tight, but then again..

microsoft controlled 90% of the operating system market when the antitrust suit was filed in 1998
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/ofnote/9-16mrktshare.mspx

Countries define what percentage qualifies as a monopoly. In the UK, a company is defined as having monopoly power when it passes 25% market share.
http://economicsonline.co.uk/Market_failures/Monopoly_power.html

In the US, 100% has never been required to qualify as a monopoly. Standard Oil controlled 91% of production, and 85% of US sales four years before the antitrust suit was filed.

Section 2 of the sherman antitrust act:

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony

And to be prosecuted under that section, two things have to be proven:

(1) the possession of monopoly power in the relevant market and
        (2) the willful acquisition or maintenance of that power as distinguished from growth or development as a consequence of a superior product, business acumen, or historic accident.

#2 is called the rule of reason - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_reason

You get more bang for your buck with read caching (more activities read from disk than write to it)

Even if you have 10 times more reads than writes, if your reads can be done at 50000/sec but your writes can only be done at 200-1000/sec (1-5 ms access time), then your writes remain a noticeable bottleneck.

And If you're still using XP you might be interested to read this: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc959914.aspx
For every scan of a directory (even cached) XP by default will WRITE to the drive just to update the last access timestamps!

Linux had that problem too but see noatime and relatime.

The difference is we get a choice, we don't have to accept what they create. Pity the poor fools on Windows, they are about to get Metro whether they want it or not and they aren't going to have many options. Heard the latest? The prereleases have been hacked to default to a normal desktop but the RTM has 'fixed' those hacks so they won't work. They aren't going to allow em to escape. Of course corporate types will be able to stay on Win7 for years; end users won't be able to buy a new PC without 8 after the new year.

Agreed regarding the Metro loophole business, though I'm sure this isn't the last we've heard on this.

Sadly, though, I'd like to present you the Flamebait of the Day award for that last bit.
Windows Vista release = Jan 2007
Windows XP still available from Dell = October 2012
My sources are telling me Windows 7 will follow much the same plans as XP did, with availability as a "downgrade" option for the next year at the very least.

Furthermore, Microsoft STILL allows downgrades from some Win7 editions to WinXP! (see http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/pages/downgrade_rights.aspx)

my mate's just got a new job doing WPF dev, its not working fast enough for them so he's brought in to fix it - its written by some outsourced contractors in the very latest MVVMVMMD patterm and he was describing how 'random'' it all appears - you can't trace through the code as it hops from object to object because every so often you hit a lambda function and if you're not really careful, you'll step right over that in the debugger - and then have to start your debug chain (of 100 methods calls) all over again.

And no, I didn't make up the MVVMVMMD pattern up!

My problem with it is that it's supposed to increase developer productivity, but no-one seems interested in keeping it simple anymore.

I'm surprised no one pointed this out yet, but different game stores use different programming languages.

For example:

Xbox Live Arcade - C# with XNA for Indie games, C++ for standard games (I think...)

iOS (iPhone/iPad) - Objective C, and you'll need a Mac with XCode to develop for it.

PS3/Wii - C++, but as far as I can tell, they do not make Indie development easy.

Windows/Mac/Linux - Any language that will run on them. The most widely used languages for each platform are likely C++ for Windows, Objective C for Mac, and C for Linux.

What I would like to see is being able to disable UEFI Secure boot, via the UEFI prompt. If you have physical access to a machine, and the UEFI password (if there is one), then I can't see much of a security risk that would bother anyone.

Seriously? How can you conclude secure boot is anticompetitive and then go on to demonstrate you have no idea how Microsoft is implementing this? They're doing *exactly* what you would "like to see."

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/windows/hardware/jj128256

"Mandatory. Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of PKpriv. A Windows Server may also disable Secure Boot remotely using a strongly authenticated (preferably public-key based) out-of-band management connection, such as to a baseboard management controller or service processor. Programmatic disabling of Secure Boot either during Boot Services or after exiting EFI Boot Services MUST NOT be possible. Disabling Secure Boot must not be possible on ARM systems."

In summary: you are guaranteed to be able to disable secure boot on your next x86 laptop or desktop purchase.

Except they can just turn off SecureBoot

As posted above, from: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/windows/hardware/jj128256

Disabling Secure Boot must not be possible on ARM systems.

Do your research before you condemn, please.

Personally, *I* want to be able to change the firmware on a widely released ARM platform...

My understanding is that they want Linux running within Windows, not so much the other way around.

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/server-cloud/hyper-v-server/default.aspx

Except they can just turn off SecureBoot

As posted above, from: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/windows/hardware/jj128256

  Mandatory. Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of PKpriv. A Windows Server may also disable Secure Boot remotely using a strongly authenticated (preferably public-key based) out-of-band management connection, such as to a baseboard management controller or service processor. Programmatic disabling of Secure Boot either during Boot Services or after exiting EFI Boot Services MUST NOT be possible. Disabling Secure Boot must not be possible on ARM systems.

Do your research before you condemn, please.

As posted above by an Anon, from: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/windows/hardware/jj128256

  Mandatory. Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of PKpriv. A Windows Server may also disable Secure Boot remotely using a strongly authenticated (preferably public-key based) out-of-band management connection, such as to a baseboard management controller or service processor. Programmatic disabling of Secure Boot either during Boot Services or after exiting EFI Boot Services MUST NOT be possible. Disabling Secure Boot must not be possible on ARM systems.

I don't think there's much to have "play out." Just turn it off if you don't like it.

Same happens at MS.. upload a file that violates their code of conduct policy to MS sky drive, and your windows 7 phone account will be permanently blocked without telling what file caused it or getting any good response.

Note that that includes files that are not yet shared of, and includes partial nudity

Not just like Google, then, because if Google blocks your Google+ account, only your Google+ account gets blocked, regardless of a bunch of widely-repeated erroneous reporting early on.

Same happens at MS.. upload a file that violates their code of conduct policy to MS sky drive, and your windows 7 phone account will be permanently blocked without telling what file caused it or getting any good response.

Note that that includes files that are not yet shared of, and includes partial nudity

Mind if I point you to someone else using "surface" for both products: http://www.microsoft.com/global/surface/en/us/renderingassets/surfacespecsheet.pdf

While DirectSound and DirectInput are now deprecated, you now have XAudio2 (or Core Audio, depending on your needs) and XInput. XInput isn't an exact replacement, however, since it only supports XBox360 controllers and those that can emulate one with their drivers.

While DirectSound and DirectInput are now deprecated, you now have XAudio2 (or Core Audio, depending on your needs) and XInput. XInput isn't an exact replacement, however, since it only supports XBox360 controllers and those that can emulate one with their drivers.

Here is a complete list of Win32 APIs that are supported for Metro apps. If you look under "Graphics", you'll notice that it has Direct2D and Direct3D, but not OpenGL.

OpenGL isn't part of the Win32 API.

Here is a complete list of Win32 APIs that are supported for Metro apps. If you look under "Graphics", you'll notice that it has Direct2D and Direct3D, but not OpenGL.

Sir, this is complete, utter bullshit.

DirectX gets almost nothing “much earlier”, because it has no extension mechanism. With DirectX you are stuck with the latest version. It has obvious advantages, but early features are certainly not amongst them. Think what you want about the ARB, it does release and releases often.

As for the documentation being terrible and vague, that's pretty uninformed, too. Every extension is fully documented and the vendors know precisely what needs to be implemented. There is no Direct3D equivalent of the 600-page OpenGL specification. The DirectX documentation is a programmer’s guide, not a specification. Every single version of the GLSL standard comes with a full grammar of the language which lets you reimplement a parser or compiler. There is no such thing as a grammar for HLSL (the D3D equivalent). What Microsoft calls a “grammar” for HLSL can be found here and anyone not even in the field of graphics programming will immediately understand how much of a joke it is compared to this (pages 166 to 174).

(Source: I work on Windows, Linux, PS3, Xbox and mobile game engines)

Unlikely in their Linux driver and I'm not sure how the 'Protected Media Path' is doing in Win7; but in Vista's PMP implementation a driver bug of this flavor(especially in the GPU, since that needs to enforce OPM restrictions) could theoretically lead to cryptographic revocation of the driver...

"If a trusted component in the PE becomes compromised, after due process it will be revoked. However, Microsoft provides a renewal mechanism to install a newer trusted version of the component when one becomes available."

In Linux, I don't think that this bug gives you an greater control than root would ordinarily have through /dev/mem, it's just a major issue because only root is supposed to have that, and even they are generally advised not to mess with it.

So just like Windows and Linux (too many to link), basically?

Windows loves developers, OS X hates developers, Linux IS developers.

OS X hates developers so much that it gives it's development tools away for free.

...but only if you own a Mac. Which makes sense for OSX tools, but that also applies to iOS tools...

And are you implying that you can't get Microsoft's development tools for free?

Congratulations. You are the 10,000 slashdotter to point this out. You win the prize of a (download) copy of Windows 8 Preview.
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/release-preview

See I know you know better then what you are saying so it makes me wonder why you are deliberately spreading information that is wrong and so easily verifiable as not correct. http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/BUILD/BUILD2011/TOOL-531T "And you have your choice of world-class development tools and languages. JavaScript, C#, VB, C++, C, HTML, CSS, XAML, all for X86-64 and ARM." "This is an extremely important point: If you go and build your Metro style app in JavaScript and HTML, in C# or in XAML, that app will just run when there's ARM hardware available. So, you donâ(TM)t have to worry about that. Just write your application in HTML5, JavaScript and C# and XAML and your application runs across all the hardware that Windows 8 supports." http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/exec/ssinofsky/2011/09-13BUILD.aspx

No I actually meant a virtual PC included in Microsoft office. There are still some links to version of the product on the web for example: http://www.microsoft.com/australia/office/mac/virtualpc7/default.aspx So for example Microsoft Virtual PC 6 came with Office 2004 for Mac (this was after Microsoft bought Connectix).

Anyway I've never heard people consider the experience of a PC via. Parallels to be near native. I'm not sure what that is owing to, but it doesn't seem in practice to be much different than using VirtualPC.

Even an MS shill should provide links. I go to http://microsoft.com/ and there is not word one about any Olympics coverage. Trying microsoft.com/olympics results in a page not found. Are you even telling the truth about this? If so, they sure don't publicize it. Of course you probably just made the whole thing up so you could snipe at Google again like you always do. Show us the links or it isn't real.

ActiveSync is available for Outlook 2010 and older as a plugin (called, in traditional MS fashion, the Microsoft Office Outlook Hotmail Connector), and I believe will be built into Outlook 2013 when it comes out. No clue about Mac Outlook though (AFAIK it's not currently supported).

I support Quickbooks as a consultant/sysadmin for SMBs.

I have felt your pain. Which is why I wanted to respond when I noticed this part...

And it's compounded by the fact Windows XP doesn't route data over the ethernet as a priority over WiFi connection.

Check out the first set of instructions in http://support.microsoft.com/kb/894564 which should let you set a wired connection to a higher priority than a wireless.

Let me help you with that. If you're going to shill then at least give us something that isn't so easily debunked.

The line feeding electricity to Agra-Bareilly transmission section (400-kV Bina Gwalior line) is in a bad condition. Engineers at Microsoft Research most likely have a solution to this, and it is wind power.

If people in India and around the world would use more local wind power this wouldn't happen.

Cheers, Dr. Matt

Wind? Reliable power for 1.2 billion people?

Geez, don't let reality intrude into your fantasies.

Microsoft Research has done publications on mobile phone enabled banking. Maybe that's the answer.

Actually, Microsoft Research has published many papers over this. One of them consist of using cloud computing as heating source. This is extremely good for something like the mountains of Pakistan where it can get a bit cold.

The line feeding electricity to Agra-Bareilly transmission section (400-kV Bina Gwalior line) is in a bad condition. Engineers at Microsoft Research most likely have a solution to this, and it is wind power.

If people in India and around the world would use more local wind power this wouldn't happen.

Cheers, Dr. Matt

Yes and your historical facts are wrong. Xerox had pieces of those technologies and prototypes of those technologies. If you blur out enough details typewriters were "essentially" computer word processors. Forget Apple. The guys who left Xerox to form Adobe did so because Interpress (later Postscript later PDF) was not the direction Xerox choose to go. Adope really did invent stuff. The idea of Postscript is not the same as the reality of Postscript.

Go to http://research.microsoft.com/ and you can see something very much like Parc today all sorts of incredible innovations.

in response to question about the walled garden you just get DEVELOPERS!, DEVELOPERS!, DEVELOPERS!, ...Resistance is futile you will work for the APPLE, Resistance is futile you will work for the APPLE, Resistance is futile you will work for the APPLE,

Umm, Ballmer was talking about third-party developers in his music video. The Microsoft equivalent to the Apple page to which you're pointing is here.

"There will be a mechanism to turn off this method of booting on x86 hardware."

What's OpenBSD supposed to do on ARM, where Microsoft has mandated that Secure Boot can't be disabled? From the Microsoft "Windows Hardware Certification Requirements", page 116:

MANDATORY: Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of Pkpriv. Programmatic disabling of Secure Boot either during Boot Services or after exiting EFI Boot Services MUST NOT be possible. Disabling Secure MUST NOT be possible on ARM systems.

OpenBSD is on a lot more platforms than just x86.

A full format does NOT.
The difference between a Quick and a Full format is that a Full format will attempt to READ the full disk after a format, while the Quick, simply writes a new table.

For older versions of windows, Microsoft says:

When you choose to run a regular format on a volume, files are removed from the volume that you are formatting and the hard disk is scanned for bad sectors. The scan for bad sectors is responsible for the majority of the time that it takes to format a volume.

If you choose the Quick format option, format removes files from the partition, but does not scan the disk for bad sectors. Only use this option if your hard disk has been previously formatted and you are sure that your hard disk is not damaged.

You can't test for bad sectors with a read-only pass of the disk, you have to write each byte, and try to read it.
Left unsaid is whether the scan-for-bad-sectors uses a destructive write technique, or a pick-it-up, write-underneath, and put-it-back-down non destructive write technique. This omission has lead to emphatic statements on both sides of the issue. Often by people who only write blogs for a living.

For windows 7, Microsoft says:

Quick format is a formatting option that creates a new file table on a hard disk but does not fully overwrite or erase the disk. A quick format is much faster than a normal format, which fully erases any existing data on the hard disk.

Since they now say that the data is fully erased, I tend to suspect it is so, because it would only take one court case to reveal the truth, and tag Microsoft with huge claims for false advertising.

A full format does NOT.
The difference between a Quick and a Full format is that a Full format will attempt to READ the full disk after a format, while the Quick, simply writes a new table.

For older versions of windows, Microsoft says:

When you choose to run a regular format on a volume, files are removed from the volume that you are formatting and the hard disk is scanned for bad sectors. The scan for bad sectors is responsible for the majority of the time that it takes to format a volume.

If you choose the Quick format option, format removes files from the partition, but does not scan the disk for bad sectors. Only use this option if your hard disk has been previously formatted and you are sure that your hard disk is not damaged.

You can't test for bad sectors with a read-only pass of the disk, you have to write each byte, and try to read it.
Left unsaid is whether the scan-for-bad-sectors uses a destructive write technique, or a pick-it-up, write-underneath, and put-it-back-down non destructive write technique. This omission has lead to emphatic statements on both sides of the issue. Often by people who only write blogs for a living.

For windows 7, Microsoft says:

Quick format is a formatting option that creates a new file table on a hard disk but does not fully overwrite or erase the disk. A quick format is much faster than a normal format, which fully erases any existing data on the hard disk.

Since they now say that the data is fully erased, I tend to suspect it is so, because it would only take one court case to reveal the truth, and tag Microsoft with huge claims for false advertising.

Eraser for Windows is probably what you want. Though if you can't install anything, sdelete is probably more useful.

An excellent writeup at Microsoft:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc512578.aspx

Sure. You want Windows 8 Hardware Certification Requirements, client and server systems, System.Fundamentals.Firmware.UEFISecureBoot; specifically:

17. Mandatory. On non-ARM systems, the platform MUST implement the ability for a physically present user to select between two Secure Boot modes in firmware setup: "Custom" and "Standard". Custom Mode allows for more flexibility as specified in the following:

It shall be possible for a physically present user to use the Custom Mode firmware setup option to modify the contents of the Secure Boot signature databases and the PK. This may be implemented by simply providing the option to clear all Secure Boot databases (PK, KEK, db, dbx), which puts the system into setup mode.

If the user ends up deleting the PK then, upon exiting the Custom Mode firmware setup, the system is operating in Setup Mode with SecureBoot turned off.

The firmware setup shall indicate if Secure Boot is turned on, and if it is operated in Standard or Custom Mode. The firmware setup must provide an option to return from Custom to Standard Mode which restores the factory defaults.On an ARM system, it is forbidden to enable Custom Mode. Only Standard Mode may be enabled.

18. Mandatory. Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of PKpriv. A Windows Server may also disable Secure Boot remotely using a strongly authenticated (preferably public-key based) out-of-band management connection, such as to a baseboard management controller or service processor. Programmatic disabling of Secure Boot either during Boot Services or after exiting EFI Boot Services MUST NOT be possible. Disabling Secure Boot must not be possible on ARM systems.

So the switch is indeed forbidden on ARM, but is explicitly required on x86.

The point is not really moot, because both Fedora and Ubuntu have only made arrangements to run on x86 with the Microsoft singing key; it won't let them run on ARM, and they're not planning anything to change that. So in that respect they haven't compromised on any freedoms for the users to be able to modify and replace any OS code, they just made it more convenient for the most common case of running stock kernel/bootloader.

Windows ARM tablets may or may not become more common, that is yet to be seen - this perch is mostly Apple's right now, with Android trying hard to squeeze some of it for itself. Either way, being locked down like that is common for most ARM devices, so nothing new there - Win8/ARM tablets are simply not real PCs in that sense, much like iPads are not real Macs.

After a particularly painful experience I've sworn off Windows Live forever. So have a couple of other people that I've spoken with. Microsoft just does NOT get it... I don't have very high hopes for their app store. None at all. In fact, I have almost no hope for it. Apps are for phones, not desktops.