Slashdot Mirror

Ugh. There's a lot to like about C#, but I would never call it beautiful. It's got more keywords than C++, it's chock full of silly features (did you know you can use a keyword as an identifier if you prefix it with @?), and, most egregiously, Microsoft commonly pollutes the language to make up for deficiencies in their toolset.

(Oh, and Spotlight is a lot deeper than just a nice interface on top of the existing search.)

You might also be surprised by what AppleScript is capable of. It has support for very modern features, including inheritance, exceptions, closures, eval... It's not meant to be the shell - that's why OS X ships with bash, tcsh, and zsh. It's more like VB Script, except vastly nicer and easier to write. (Your criticism of its syntax is dead on, but believe it or not, AppleScript really does have a syntax, which as far as I know has only been fully documented once.)

Apple definitely has the in-house people to write an OS. The guy who wrote Mach works at Apple. The author of one of the slickest filesystems ever works there too. Oh yeah, and remember this guy? Seriously, Apple has been out-delivering Microsoft since 2001; you can't pick on them for not knowing how to write an OS.

(And, just to be snarky, Microsoft got their kernel folks from somewhere else too.)

I'm glad my OS was designed by, err, designers, incidentally. Apple has some computer science folk, but a computer scientist designing an OS is like a physicist designing a car.

I'm eagerly awaiting Longhorn, incidentally.

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=157615&thre shold=-1&commentsort=0&tid=95&mode=thread&pid=1322 5084

You had to back down to apk there and said you would be cool to him. A typical treacherous whimp arstechnica move. Hilarious that was.

apk trashed you badly there with facts as he has your arstechnica colleague here as well.

Yes, I read that about your debate with APK over there at that url from this site, interiot, and apk totally kicked your ass using facts as he always does.

Accurate verifiable ones. Unlike yours.

To wit:

From this url and its content, where Jeremy Reimer and your arstechnica crew tried to say it was his mother he lives with?

apk stated first of all, it was his father's address here:

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=124

And proved that much because jan = john in european languages, his ancestry/lineage.

It seems you arshole technica dolts make your usual blunders and are, as apk stated, uncultured boors.

Bad mistakes on that note once more by arstechnican libellers.

The fact apk is smart using a single address to centralize any postal mail rather than pay for p.o. boxes and such makes sense to myself also. I do the same while I travel.

It is a fact that in the U.S.A. you can centralize your mailing address and it is wise to do so imho.

Just as apk did such in the manner that he does as he travels on contracts through out the United States.

Once again interiot and arstechnica per their usual look stupid yet again.

Score apk 50, arstechnica 0 (or, in StarKruzr's case -1 over here where he started an attack on apk and was destroyed):

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=161862&cid=135 32123

This reminds me of when Mace Windu and his 3 Jedi knight fellows tried to attack Chancellor Palpatine/Darth Sidious.

You narrow minded single focus dogmatic view 'jedi' (as StarKruzr calls himself in his profile here) are no match for a Sith Lord in apk.

Or, do the facts show any differently? I read all of those url posts and know you, in all of your anonymous luser arstechnica hordes hound him only to your own demise each and every time online.

Do you like punishment and humiliation? Keep coming at him.

apk just does you in every time easily.

For anyone's reference to points I am about to make, 3 feet of facts not insanity as StarKruzr stated:

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=124

(If you need to wade thru their ads & cookies, again, just see the last page (124 @ this point before those 2 attempt to bury it) & the 2nd posting down - it's quite amusing regarding Jeremy Reimer and Jay Little, and they only brought it on themselves pursuing me there as they are wont to do, and many arstechnicans 5 years later STILL do, as StarKruzr himself here has)

StarKruzr probably is Jeremy Reimer really, I would wager/guess. In fact, I would take a guess, & say that like Reimer, his ISP/BSP is Shaw.ca...

(Moderators - up to you to check on that, but somehow, I wager I am right on that note)

Here we go:

"we should make a distinction between "getting run off like a bad dog" (as you said of Mr. Reimer) and "getting bored with navigating through 3 feet of APK insanity." - by StarKruzr (74642) on Thursday September 15, @12:33PM

I don't think so, not @ all... in fact, I very well KNOW not:

Jeremy Reimer got run off for attacking me and his reactions were that of a child!

He is 33 years of age, and supposedly is a 'technical authority' & author of arstechnica articles: Albeit, one with no degree, nor certifications even, nor (above all) practical professional experience w/in it either... yet, he touts himself as a "technical author" @ arstechnica.

I don't know about you, but THAT? Reminds me of pseudo-doctors of medicine known as quacks.

His 'articles' hosted @ a site he ingratiated himself into (arstechnica) but ONLY there afaik? Some accomplishment, lol...?? Are mere historical rehashings of already known information, a high school CHILD could put together.

Nothing anybody used to gain performance, or more, as articles I authored did for KNOWN corporate entities in this very field no less.

(Articles? The easy part - writing up code, large bodies of it?? MUCH harder imo, a professional one no less).

And, Jeremy Reimer, For such a 'tech authority'?

He never ONCE posted on-topic there @ Windows IT Pro either iirc/afaik... in fact, I welcome anyone to verify that.

Instead, Jeremy Reimer had to summon Jay Little to help him in THAT capacity.

What was the result? LOL, Jay Little failed, badly, as that URL there catches in quotes he made directed my way, many of them using EXTREME profanity & worse.

(That's not joking around - he is quite the "exciteable boy", & should not be if you note some of this profane quotes directed my way from he that I quoted, lol: That, & the fact Jay Little weighs what appears to be 350lbs or more of PURE LARD? Well being 'upset/hyper' for a fatboy like that is definitely NOT good for him... the man's a walking heart-attack & a hideous corpulent monstrosity & parody of a man... to let one's self go to THAT extent? A sin imo!)

BUT, both Jay Little and Jeremy Reimer were stopped in email harassing myself once both were repeatedly asked to stop doing it (and neither would not listen & Jeremy Reimer even denied that his ISP contacted him, I quoted otherwise)...

Jay Little had a BIT worse happen (being kicked from his webpage hosting provider, which must have HURT him as I know he works on Navision products & does .ASP etc. and CrystalTech.com is one of the FEW that do ASP iirc... this may have burned him worse than I thought, but again: He brought it on himself)

Jay Little, above all, just got used like a STOOGE imo by Jeremy Reimer. I hope he realizes it.

After all, Jay Little came there @ the behest of Jeremy Reimer and acted MUCH worse than Jeremy Reimer did in many ways, imo... then again, I do not think he is too smart either, just judging by his career & results there at the URL above which a

"Get help, APK" - by StarKruzr on Thursday September 15, @03:49AM

Don't need it against you, all I need are facts, like the question of mine you avoided for @ least 10 posts now. You attacking me first here & your name calling of me? Proves that point cleanly!

"Who's running? Not me" - by StarKruzr on Thursday September 15, @03:49AM

OK - Then, answer my questions here, or do you need to continue lying as you have been:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=161862&thresho ld=-1&commentsort=0&tid=146&mode=thread&pid=135492 82

(The main one's RIGHT @ the top of that page!)

Just answer it & HERE publicly, that's all I ask... you have evaded it thru @ least 10 posts by now. Do you realize how POORLY that alone makes you look?

(After what you said to me & about me here which I note in my p.s. below? I would, just to admit I was wrong were I you)...

Then again, if you do answer it? YOU LOSE FACE HERE, badly. Which is WHY you have avoided answering that question like the plague it seems!

LOL!

(Kind of a pickle you put yourself in, eh? Like I said earlier - you arstechnicans? So easy to maneuver into a corner you can't escape by using your OWN words no less, everytime! Just like @ the Windows IT Pro mag forums I cite below as well!)

"you've been known to lie in the past" - by StarKruzr on Thursday September 15, @03:49AM

Where, show us all, where? Prove it please. I show you evade questions I have been asking you for @ least 10 posts now.

Such as the Windows IT Pro points/examples from there about arstechnicans you mentioned no less as well which you now avoid like the plague also.

(There, though? Their forums mods AND Dr. Russinovich, the PhD lol, first edited out my posts wholesale since PhD Mark Russinovich couldn't disprove my points which toss his article into the wastebin, along with its namecalling of other software authors like myself).

Now, where they once edited out my points ENTIRELY (which I exposed them for here, which shamed them & they stopped doing it... an 'ancient jedi mindtrick' but an EFFECTIVE one nevertheless, lol, well? NOW, they disabled my account there so I cannot blow away the last point of theirs I wanted to on LOBS/BLOBS).

That however, is NO biggie - Tomorrow, I can just post from the job to put the final nail into their coffins factually. There's NO stopping that, as I have not posted from there yet to that page I cite below yet from work.

(That's JUST to get my last point in on LOBS/BLOBS, & blow them away for this latest antic of theirs of disabling my account now, & get the better of them yet again, on technical issues there).

Anyhow, on THAT note & that site? WELL now, if anyone lies and loads of them? I can PROVE it's your arstechnica crew, easily. Including yourself with your last statement in the title of your post no less... bad move!

E.G. -> The Windows IT Pro URL where I ran your pals off, Jay Little & Jeremy Reimer whom you mentioned earlier??

If ANYONE was caught lying, it was arstechnica people like yourself... The VERY arstechnicans you yourself mentioned in Jay Little specifically in fact & Jeremy Reimer:

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=124

(If you have to deal with their cookies & ads? Just see the last page, 124 specifically, & the 2nd post on it for the facts)

Jay Little's (another arstechnican like you who made the mistake of attacking me, email harassing me non-stop with Jeremy Reimer, also busted for that too, & libelling myself & violating his TOS with his hosting provider) own lies ran him right out of Windows IT Pro forums in fa

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=161862&thresho ld=-1&commentsort=0&tid=146&mode=thread&cid=135528 83

If that is to whom you refer as apk++, then you most certainly got yourself into a jam, student, and got your behind reamed.

There at that url above, You couldn't show any of the readers here anything you'd done when you were asked by apk there to do so. You could produce nothing at all that is noted at all anywhere online because you are not at the stage yet.

With your arrogance, name calling, and profanity like you use? I agree as was said at the above url about you that You never will most likely as that person stated.

StarKruzer = poor little 'Paduan Learner' at best it appears.

(You tried to take on a 'Sith Lord' from what I read here at that URL above, after I took your advice and started following your posts as you accused me of initially).

Ha, you had to walk out of that one with your tail between your legs boy and were left speechless. No doubt because when it came down to cases and evidences of accomplishment, you had squat.

You got SPANKED!

I did not know who you were referring to, but now I do from taking your advice and following your postings here.

What a great laugh it was watching you get destroyed.

Finish that degree and get some real world practical experience boy. As you see you need it.

Your narrow minded "jedi" view (academia only, paduan learner) wasn't even close to a match for someone that has decades of practical real world experience on you. Anyone reading that url above can see that.

As far as that jaylittle thing? I just took a peek at that too, and went farther into google for more on it and I turned up quite the laugh at apk vs. arstechnica and its 'anonymous luser hordes' trying to take him on.

You had best take a peek at this page then, where both a PHD (apparently from that first url above the degree level you are still attempting to achieve as a mere student still), which counts for next to zero until you have worked in this field as a pro imho as well.

Here, below, your arstechnica pals got totally annihilated at WindowsIT pro mag forums as well:

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=124

In fact it got so bad that jay little got run off and it is quoted so in the second posting down by this APK person, quotes of your pal Jay Little being run right off like a bad dog.

And, from what I read there?

Then the forums master at Windows IT pro mag and dr russinovich phd had to try edit out apk's posts because they and all of arstechnica could not get the better of him.

They all got exposed here at slashdot for doing it.

Shaming them both and rightfully so.

You arstechnica students, you're nothing but big talking arrogant underachievers that talk a great deal but as to something to show others that they can use or things that have proven useful to others online for their gain in performance or other areas?

You have nothing to show. Just loads of bull.

Real world results count, don't you understand that boy?

Go out, do something useful with your time talker, before you get spanked again like that first url above clearly shows.

Here's a link to another article that gives some more specific info (and a whole lot of fanboi gushing from Paul Thurrott).

I quote: Starter Edition will allow only three applications (and/or three windows) to run simultaneously, will provide Internet connectivity but not incoming network communications
No incoming network communications? Three thoughts spring to mind:
1)MS has a hard time enough time trying to stop unwanted incoming network communications as it is. I bet it's cracked in a fortnight.
2) Won't this comms cutoff limit a fair bit of net functionality? Obviously incoming comms for established connections would be OK, but still.
3) Some enterprising cracker will almost certainly get around this. Once they do, those Starter Edition boxes almost certainly won't be running a firewall. Windows Firewall is mentioned as being included in Home Basic, but not Starter, and running a 3rd party firewall would occupy one of the three application spaces available (not desirable). Not to mention that anyone clueless enough to buy Starter wouldn't know what a firewall is anyway. If these Starter boxes are successfully cracked, and if Starter sells well in developing nations (could happen), a whole new wave of zombie boxens could arise.

Thanks for nothing MS.

Really? Because I lived through that era, and I and a bunch of other folks that did think otherwise. I was a VMS user long before NT ever came out. Coming from a VMS background, it's not hard to see more similarities in the foundation of the OS than I see with it and OS/2.

I can point you to quite a few other sites with evidence that NT is more based on VMS with just some compatible bits from OS/2 included.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Print.cfm?Art icleID=4494

Looks the the terminology, the table of significant similarities, etc. They included an OS/2 compatability layer and some bits and pieces they had been working on from OS/2, but the basics of the system were VMS-like.

It wasn't just Dave Culter MS hired away from VMS, it was also about 20 former Digital employees that had worked with him on the Mica project, a whole new updated version of VMS. Whether or not they included exact code they wrote for Mica in NT (and Microsoft's settlement with DEC implies there was), you know they had to implement some of the ideas they had been working on. Software developers rarely like to give up on good new ideas they invent and DEC killed Mica. Incorporating those ideas in NT was the only way they would see the light of day.

For a graphical representation:

That's hardly a scholarly study of OS history. Have you looked at their links for references? It's nothing special. For Microsoft, they have exactly two link as references, and one of them is the exact article I posted above for you which states that NT *is* a direct descendent of VMS.

And lastly, if NT is a direct descendent of VMS, who is the idiot that removed the stability bits?

In case you hadn't noticed, NT has to run on a LOT more different types of hardware than VMS ever had to. Most of the instability in NT came from driver issues. It's not really surprising that it's more unstable than VMS. As a server/desktop rather than a server only OS, Microsoft also made some choices to help out it's desktop performance (moving video to ring0 in NT4, etc) that didn't help stability at all.

This is obviously the SAME person who posted over at Windows IT Pro as "anonymous luser" & attempts to state he is the one editing out my points...

Well, ok (you only brought this on yourself)... So, put your "mental seatbelts" on, you'll need 'em, especially @ the end, where you make such a horrendous technical oversight, it's laughable, so I will requote my reply from Windows IT Pro to you from this URL:

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=121

Right here below:

---

Ahem - (b.s. *cough*).

He wrote that about anyone that wrote such programs, & that also includes myself (since I did the first GUI model).

* Not even a "NICE TRY" pal...

"Not only a blowhard, but a paranoid blowhard at that!" - Anonymous User - August 31, 2005

One that reduced you to the name-tossing you are doing above (care to show me your PhD in psychiatry/psychology by the way, the one you MOST LIKELY do not have there Dr. Phil?)

Name-tossing out of frustration:

A certain sign of defeat online in technical debate, no doubt about it... see the arstechnicans like Jeremy Reimer, Jay Little, + others of their ilk above I quote/cite, so they embarass themselves with their own antics.

I warned Dr. Russinovich about that in email, by the way, beforehand.

(BUT, the antics of the forums masters here? Lame!)

I mean, lol, having to edit out of my post of 14 points above?

(That stopped, but THAT took shaming the forums master here, or whoever was doing it, over @ slashdot pointing it out publicly there, whatever works... just an "ancient jedi mind trick", lol, but effective!)

Anyhow...

Shameful - I thought you people here had class, obviously not!

Only just judging by tactics like editing out my 14 points post above that YOUR PhD author here obviously (along with all of arstechnica as well, lol) cannot disprove its content in said 14 points.

The content in those 14 points above?

Well, obviously/clearly, they throw this article's premise, & its terminating paragraph's name tossing to those such as myself that wrote up such programs, RIGHT into the 'circular file' now, don't they?

The UNBELIEVEABLE ARROGANCE, and unprofessional rudeness of this author (along with his SoftIce, WinDbg, & DLL Injection built career, lol), who caps his article with THIS line, again from the Anonymous User who posted it above & noted it also as I did:

"if RAM optimization were possible (and could be implemented by so many small-time upstarts)," - Dr. Mark Russinovich

Dr. Russinovich, your calling other software author's names as he did was unprofessional here.

I openly challenged he, or anybody else (including whoever was editing out my posts) to disprove each of my points, with facts... that's all!

Too much for you boys? Apparently so...

APK

P.S.=> Like I said before: Hey, Dr. Russinovich, "Run Forrest, run..."

Now, & if you DON'T like that?

Well, "sir", think of the scene in the film "Good Will Hunting" where the pompous A$$ @ the bar picks on Will's pal:

And, he just outright "schools" him on HIS turf (educational historical levels iirc, as I am doing to YOU here Dr. Russinovich on technical proofs in this field/our field) as well as mano-a-mano/head-to-head with his:

"And, if you don't like it, we can step outside if you like" & "Do you like apples? Well, I got HER number: HOW DO YOU LIKE THEM APPLES??"

Now, if you don't like that, like I said above... just disprove my list of 14 points. That's all, after all, YOU ARE "the great Dr. Mark Russinovich" right?

Plus, your forums masters here editing out my 14 points you are avoiding disproving, and running obviously from them?

Well, it's YOUR professional standing... that's all!

This "upstart" doesn't start things, but I gen

Why do I say this? First of all the URL for the site mimicks getfirefox.com. Secondly, the site itself (here is the Google cache) appears to have been lifted wholesale from getfirefox.com. Their logo is nearly identical (same colours, use of a stylized fox, etc) and they

All browsers have bugs, that's not the issue at hand. If my site works in every browser but IE, then there's a problem with IE that has to change. IE still breaks a ton of standards-compliant sites, and will do so for the foreseeable future. (you're using the MS 'future' now, so I'm sure you can attest, as your fellow win user Paul Thurrot just found out how crappy it really is)

This sucks for the real web developers who want to (and should have to) work only the amount they should need to in order to build a standards-compliant site. It's a shame that Microsoft has played such a dirty trick on the gadzillions of windows users.

"Seriously, man, you've got to be a bit loopy to go around accusing Dr Mark Russinovich of industrial espionage - unless that was a joke!"

Ahem - anybody that disassembled (or tried to, using softice) my work as he did years ago & doubtless will admit to, or have to, as I have people from LC Technology willing to witness to it!

(They were notified of it, because my wares outsold Dr. Russinovich's when we both sold our wares thru them via SunBelt Software).

It was then, no less, so he started crying like a baby first of all because his work was not selling as well as my own.

Secondly, back then, Dr. Russinovich said that "memory optimization" as he calls it could ONLY be performed by device drivers, which now?

He realizes was WAY off now in his article I pointed out here earlier, & see the URL below... then their webmaster tried to edit out my list of points:

COWARDICE! lol...

See, first of all, Dr. Russinovich & his trying disassembly of MY work (which softice is VERY simple to counter for in code by detecting its presence via certain functions, just like how the Win32 API IsDebuggerPresent works for other "stand-alone debuggers" (spelled sideways = disassembler tools) can check for WinDbg's presence as well) shows that... he's nothing more than a hack.

Point-blank.

(By the by, this attempt to do so on MY work, was circa 1995-1998 iirc when THAT happened).

Then, above all?

His very disassembly of the Windows NT-based Operating Systems NtAPI "native mode" (during bootstrap real mode etc./et all operations) API points to it as well...

Anything the Microsoft DDK (device driver kit) did not give him? He "hacked" the ntdll.dll & other NtAPI call libs for...

Don't believe it? See his own website.

* :)

APK

P.S.=> When I see a spade, I call a spade a spade... and can back it up with facts.

Why doesn't he attempt to disprove my list of 14 points then, I ask you that...

After all, my 14 points there?

They ARE backed up by sources FAR more credible than Dr. Russinovich (e.g.-> Microsoft themselves, the inventors/oem of this OS family, &/or IBM DB/2 Magazine itself for example!)

Also, others were from folks who showed memory optimizers benefitting them in various ways with their OS &/or apps too... folks with either/or degrees, certifications, &/or years of experience in this field no less...

That's my answer to you!

I only wonder why a guy who can call others names in his article (what nerve & unprofessional-ness), won't go & face the music there @ that URL:

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=121

And, try to disprove my list of facts there, even though I emailed him repeatedly to do so... emails of mine over time he has answered, especially the one I note where I found ROOKIE hardcodes (one corrected per my advice regarding C:\pagefile.sys & others I found regarding EventLogs movements from stock/oem locations on C:\ disks, both concerned moving them for GREATER PERFORMANCE, which he did not account for & hardcoded in pagedefrag.exe...

Oh, & by the way? I show simply, he's not perfect by the way... he's just a man, but one with a BIG damn mouth & cannot back up his b.s. when push comes to shove... simple!

Wake up... apk

Well, yes, WMA DOES exclude Linux:
Michael Robertson (Linspire) wrote in an article that he had actually contacted Microsoft about WMA licensing, yet Microsoft actively REFUSED to license it to his Linux distribution (ok, well, it seems WMA was allowed, but not the Digital Restrictions Management component).

See it mentioned at
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/4456 6/44566.html?Ad=1
(cannot find the original Michael's Minutes article easily, so I gave up)

But seriously, did you expect anything else from a convicted criminal predatory monopolist?

Cairo has always promised several new developments in storage technologies. The first is a full-blown content indexing engine to let users locate files anywhere on their networks. Microsoft incorporated the Cairo indexer engine as an ISAPI application that's available now as the indexer engine for IIS 2 and above. This high-performance engine allows full searching of the custom document tags I described in my article, "Exploring Cairo: Object File System," November 1995.

To make a searchable tree, you need a way to span multiple machines. NT's Distributed File System (DFS) has been in beta for a while (for information about DFS, see Sean Deuby and Tim Daniels, "DFS: A Logical View of Physical Resources," December 1996), but the real product will be Fault Tolerant DFS. Fault Tolerant DFS lets you create one large tree that spans clients and servers in your network. Obviously, such a tree is ideal for the indexer engine, and I expect we'll see more and more users leveraging this system in the future.

The final breakthrough in Cairo storage technology is the granddaddy of OLE storage, Structured Storage (SS) and the Object Filing System. Unfortunately, development on this front has gone quiet. However, Microsoft has notably improved SS in Office 97. For example, Word now allows multiple document versioning within one file, and many applications now allow concurrent read and write. I've heard that Microsoft's OFS, the set of server-side extensions to NTFS that lets it work with structured storage in a client/server fashion, is still under development but will see the light of day this year.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=120

For what I was referring to?

See that page... OR RATHER, my last replies in challenge to its author, before the crew @ Windows IT Pro magazine's forum's master, OR Dr. Russinovich possibly, edits out my 14 points I ask him to disprove once more/again.

It's a fair challenge, I merely ask him to "face up to it" since his terminating paragraph is 'fighting words' to me? I merely brought up points from Microsoft (numerous) & IBM DB/2 mag, as well as the experiences of others in this field with degrees, certifications, &/or years of experience in it vs. his articles' points.

(Inclusive of errs in his OWN work I had to help this "legendary figure" in this field understand and fix in his own wares... after he tried disassembling my own years ago no less!) :)

* Like I said above - I know how MS feels, when they confront the Linux crowd openly & directly with a challenge, & they're RUNNING from it!

(See what I mean from that URL above, & see WHY I say what I did here)

Thank-you!

Sincerely,

APK

Correct. Spam is far worse than it was a few years ago.

Oh my, I guess no one thought to look anything up for themselves before moderating:

http://www.lamlaw.com/DOJvsMicrosoft/WrapAndFlowWe ek21.html
http://www.chguy.net/news/feb99/demoMS.html
http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,17 689,00.html

Microsoft made a video showing how IE could be removed, which looked like it had been edited and was false. It would be just as easy for them to make up some 'prior art' for this case.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/1851 2/18512.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/11/ms_legal_m ail_autodestruct/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/24/allchin_de stroy_email_claim/
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/4455 5/44555.html

They may have also destroyed important e-mails. This is not the same as the current case but is worth noting anyway.

Microsoft's past actions shouldn't make it any more believable, in any case.

Oh my, I guess no one thought to look anything up for themselves before moderating:

http://www.lamlaw.com/DOJvsMicrosoft/WrapAndFlowWe ek21.html
http://www.chguy.net/news/feb99/demoMS.html
http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,17 689,00.html

Microsoft made a video showing how IE could be removed, which looked like it had been edited and was false. It would be just as easy for them to make up some 'prior art' for this case.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/1851 2/18512.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/11/ms_legal_m ail_autodestruct/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/24/allchin_de stroy_email_claim/
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/4455 5/44555.html

They may have also destroyed important e-mails. This is not the same as the current case but is worth noting anyway.

Microsoft's past actions shouldn't make it any more believable, in any case.

Gartner also recommends not using IIS, or less specific not using Microsoft servers if connected to the internet.

I also believe they have said the same about some or all of Linux from one time or another.

Gartner is kinda like the Dvorak of consulting. Say a bunch of random stuff publicly, repeat random stuff that happens to be true, rinse, and repeat.

I joined /. just to respond to this post. I've been a professional window$ developer for years. I currently work for a government research lab where no micro$oft products are used. (Even the management uses Macs.) If you would like to enlighten me on my response here, please do.

The Mozilla Corporation can begin by:

1. ending the anti-MS slander contained within their various marketing campaigns.
So basically, you're pro-Microsoft. If Mozilla wants to slander Microsoft, they're just reflecting the opinions of the people (inside and outside the organization/corporation/whatever) and therefore, being true to the FOSS model.

2. fully documenting their APIs, to the high standards of Microsofts MSDN.
WHAT? You're joking, right? Years of working with broken MSDN CD's, missing online documentation, and "undocumented" APIs and you are touting Microsoft's "documentation"? Microsoft doesn't document their API's, they do press releases masquerading as API documentation. Then you pay them for tech support, which is where you find out what's really going on. Case in point: write a .bmp file without using any Microsoft API code, and then try to open it in paint. No go.

3. settling on a standard for Firefox APIs to avoid breaking existing extensions on every major Firefox release.
So you're talking about the extensions, and not the browser, right? Okay, then. Sorry if the extensions are not as well designed as the browser. (Though, I think they are. But that's beside the point.) If you don't like it, I personally will give you your money back.

4. invest in a software update system that actually works.
The word "invest" here seems misplaced. FOSS, remember? See #6. I love Firefox updates! (Even though the update icon alerts me to updates I knew about a few days earlier, it doesn't ask me to restart my computer when it's done!)

5. pay their developers a salary, which might discourage them from defecting to other companies
Have you ever thought about corporate espionage? You see, the developers for Firefox are allowed to contribute even when they have a job! That way, they can use the skills they develop at work to contribute to the quality of mozilla software. Talent raiding doesn't work unless you convince someone (i.e. make them sign a non-compete agreement that specifically prohibits FOSS development) to stop writing for mozilla.

6. get back on track with the delayed Firefox releases
If you use Firefox, though I'm betting you use IE, then can you tell me what security holes, or which missing parts of CSS2 we are waiting for?

See article on why we should boycott IE 7.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/4720 8/47208.html?Ad=1

Seems that my last reply shut you up pretty handily, simply by citing your own mistakes here:

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=157615&cid= 13216924

A.) Using your OWN words (saying you wanted to add me to your "foes list" because of my writing style: GROW UP! The resort of the lame used by you in grammar/spellchecks)

B.) Your own "skimming" & making assumptions about my role in this field, and being WAY wrong.

Oh, by the way Interiot - Do you have a PhD in English Writing or a related field?

NO??

(Didn't think so!)

After all: If you cannot grasp the meaning of someone's words via the context in which they are utilized, or merely grasp the technical detail?

Either don't read it, learn more about it, or just admit you may have somekind of problem like ADD, or dyslexia... but realize, it's YOUR problem.

Not mine.

Everyone else responded to & dealt with my post just fine & it even modded up 1 & 2 points.

(If you have problems like that, & why you tried to pick on my writing style? WELL, that's nothing to be ashamed of and can be overcome!)

----

(Arstechnica/Interiot - Once more, You're only embarassing yourselves, via your own words & motivations regarding myself, via your OWN words in the URL I cite above.)

Funny, how you ran away pretty fast after that URL above I cited... you blew it for yourself.

* :)

Just like your arstechnica pals have for years vs. myself online (following me around, I don't bother you & avoid you - there is nothing for me to learn in this field from the likes of you is why, to be blunt about it!)...

APK

P.S.=> For me? This was TOO easy!

Especially "nailing it right on the head" you are just another 'arstechnican' trying me again, lol, & failing... Failing vs. myself, just like all of arstechnica has here for a year straight now:

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=176

Jeremy Reimer (one of your own, probably you) says "Arstechnica is the greatest single collection of talent online in computing" or something along those lines?

For such a 'great assemblage of computing knowledge/talent', how come they cannot manage to dispute & disprove the points I made there then, with specific facts to do so?

Great judge HE is (NOT!) -

Funniest part about that URL from Windows IT Pro magazine is, that I gave your arstechnica crew there EVERY fair opportunity to get the better of me, & thru the pages there?

I cited many times you've tried this on me over the years & many forums... lol, ALWAYS failing.

Now, you know better than to try me on technical matters don't you? Apparently so, & now instead, tried your "english grammar" spellcheck on me ala arstechnica methods noted here:

http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t= 2608

Do I have to cite all the times I "spanked you all" in front of everyone here on forums other than your own you followed me to (like Aryeh Holzer/Daisyman, or PeterB being absolutely DESTROYED by myself before for attempting this type of thing on me, for instance)?

Oh, I can bring those up again if you'd like... lol, but the one from Windows IT Pro will do for now.

That WindowsIT Pro article has most of them cited in its content pages thru them anyhow...

LOL, what I love is? It got a SUCH a rise outta ya there, BIG-Time.

I had such fun doing it.

I found out, You cannot beat facts. This is where I knock-the-chocolate out of your crowd everytime.

Facts.

E.G.-> Jeremy Reimer (one of your 'technical authors' @ arstechnnica no less) doesn't even have

Yes, it is OVER, now isn't it? LOL, it seems that my last reply shut you up pretty handily, simply by:

A.) Using your OWN words (saying you wanted to add me to your "foes list" because of my writing style: GROW UP! The resort of the lame used by you in grammar/spellchecks)

B.) Your own "skimming" & making assumptions about my role in this field, and being WAY wrong.

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=157615&cid= 13216924

Oh, by the way Interiot - Do you have a PhD in English Writing or a related field?

NO??

(Didn't think so!):

After all: If you cannot grasp the meaning of someone's words via the context in which they are utilized, or merely grasp the technical detail?

Either don't read it, learn more about it, or just admit you may have somekind of problem like ADD, or dyslexia...

(That's nothing to be ashamed of and can be overcome!)

* :)

(Arstechnica/Interiot - Once more, You're only embarassing yourselves, via your own words & motivations regarding myself, via your OWN words in the URL I cite above.)

Funny, how you ran away pretty fast after that URL above I cited...

APK

P.S.=> TOO easy! Especially "nailing it right on the head" you are just another 'arstechnican' trying me again, lol:

http://paperlined.org/apps/slashdot/anonymous_APK. html

Isn't that what you cited? Again - TOO easy! You make me look good. Thank-YOU!

All the edited arstechnica private playpen links you put up?

They're not here & the ones here can't be altered by you.

Here is what counts.

Not your edited/altered postings over @ arstechnica whom are known as, well, less than credible (see below) in this field worldwide.

And, anyone is free to see that I have not been to arstechnica since 2001, but searching "APK" there after that time? You turn up 5,000 or so posts about me... thanks for the flattery. You're only showing people I got to you.

LOL, you arstechnica people try me time & again online only to lose as per usual on technical issues it is not even FUNNY for me anymore, I actually pity you.

Above all - You don't know how good it is to have people of your IQ (or lack thereof) to tear apart...

I NEVER start with you, but the results showed who finished what here... Soooo, "C-YA"!

Hey Interiot? Instead of running?? Do something constructive:

WELL, How about disproving what I asked you arstechnica 'great technical people' to disprove here (for a year almost no less & you failed to) instead, @ the top of this page?

http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=176

Everyone, you have to excuse the 'geek angst' of the arstechnica children like interiot here, lol...

This describes their 'tactics' for everyone & it's not even my OWN estimations of them:

http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t= 2608

Take a read of that? And know where "interiot" is coming from - arstechnica, who have tried this for years against me online, failing as usual... just like @ the WindowsITPro forums URL above.

Again, Ah... just TOO EASY!... apk

First time I've seen APK here on Slashdot, but the incoherent ramblings and odd uses of capitalization and punctuation are all-too-familiar. For those not familiar with his general kookery, start with the Memory-Optimization Hoax article and read the comments.

Should it be possible for a big corp to throw lots of money at the key employees of the competition and drive them out of business?

Fucking lying fuckers. And the same thing never happened to Windows?!?!? That's just one of a million examples, as we all know, and for crying out loud, it's a patch from MS that's causing the problem in that one.

Right on the money! They hired David N. Cutler, NT's chief architect, who left DEC to continue his work at Microsoft.

Story here: http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Print.cfm?Art icleID=4494

You probably have figured it out, but always
like that.

"...a way for yT to actually succede in the marketplace: OEM deals."

Are you kidding? That was tried before and didn't work out. At all.

"Zeta will succede or fail on the strength of its multimedia features. period."

I guarantee it will fail, just like it did before. As a Be fan (bought R3 for Intel as soon as it came out, then R4 and 4.5; never bothered with 5 because I realized right away "This is really cool. Too bad there's not a thing I can do with it.") it pains me to say this, but if they couldn't make a dent in 1998, they don't have a prayer today. MS Windows and Mac OS both have multiprocessor support, both ship with video editing apps, and hardware is fast enough that a cruft-free OS is not the selling point it once was. Why would anyone, other than an enthusiast or hobbyist, buy this?

Yes, I loved how quickly it booted. Yes, I loved watching 5 movies playing faster than 1x because I had 'caps lock' pressed when I launched them... on a P150. (R3 only.) Yes, 3DSound was great fun to play with but they didn't ship it until R4.5, IIRC, and it would crash like mad. Without Photoshop or Netscape I had no reason to run it then, and a cool platform to run Firefox is not that compelling today.

Same article was posted last week, was it not?

And anyways; big whooping deal!

1. It will *fail*. The cable companies, and alternate provides (like TiVO) will crush Intel, Microsoft, and anyone elses who attempts to develop a media pc. Why? Because the average consumer is much more willing to have an instant-on appliance managed by an outside operator which looks to cost very little (only $5 more on your monthly bill!) than an expensive looking ($500-$1000 at your local electronics store) box with a moderately arcane setup (all you have to do is use this IR transceiver to transmit codes to your cable box, and then program it for the right codes!, or something to do with this new 'cablecard' deal, which few people (especially the cable companies) seem to know much about)).

Also, I suspect the Windows-based media boxen will be notoriously unreliable and buggy. Also late. Look at Microsoft's IPTV initiative. It's running *way* late. Even for the providers that are already signed up! SBC's techs are sweating bullets right now:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2005-06-07-sbc -usat_x.htm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/01/ms_iptv_st rategy_in_tatters/

While it *looks* like Microsoft is on-track with Comcast, Comcast excutives have repeatedly said they are evalutating both iGuide (their current supplier) as well as Microsoft for their boxes. And historically, Microsoft has a terrible record when dealing with cable companies:
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Windows/Article/Articl eID/15996/15996.html

Do you *really* expect to have any of these companies roll out a full MS solution on-time without siginificant bugs? I don't, and as soon as one supplies switches, or has a miserable failure (ready Comcast's Oregon MS set-top system freezes for a week) the whole market will break loose.

Which, incidentially, is how Microsoft lost the *rest* of the world regarding IPTV and set-top boxes, which is especially ironic given their size (4737489372 pound gorrilla), and that most content providers started out by saying that the MS solution was their future.

2. Intel's DRM will be cracked. Anyone play a DVD on linux? Did you do it using your licensed player, or your technically illegal libdvdcss? (Except, of course, in a few countries in the world. U.S. is *not* including). This is the primary way that people play DVDs on linux; this is not a niche solution.

3. Most likely, Intel will provide a closed-source kernel module that will provide an API to interact with a closed-source graphics driver. Nvidia and ATI will do the same thing, as well. So you'll be able to get gimped, DRM TV on your linux box, as well.

People have been crying that the sky has been falling for a long time. The problem is, Intel/Micosoft have never been able to deliever the 'killer' solution that ends all competition. They are always a day late and a dollar short. I really just don't consider them a serious threat.

A *far* more serious threat to home linux theatre PCs is the arcane setup required for most linux DVR projects. Fix that mess, and you'll see cheap linux home theatre pc's avaliable at walmart.

Not that I'm blaming the MythTV developers, or the Freevo developers. But it is hard to get those projects up and running correctly at home, and I imagine that from a developer perspective it looks easier to build an MS solution than a Linux solution, which is why the big media distribution companies are looking at MS first.

Once they get their hands wet (as the European firms did), they give up on the MS bugs. I expect an annoucement from Bellsouth to that effect shortly.

Your right. The following link is a story about how Microsoft stole the NT kernel from Digital. http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Print.cfm?Art icleID=4494

Does anybody else find it ironic that Microsoft that stole a kernel is touting that Linux isn't clean? The best part is that VMS and NT are so simular that even some of the terminology is the same. Maybe Darl took lessons from Microsoft, except SCO is claiming to be the victem.

I thought it was relatively well-known speculation that much of NT was ripped off from DEC's VMS, especially considering DEC filed suit against Microsoft and MS ended up settling out of court.

Windows continues to be a world where, out of the box, people set up their boxen with everyone at administrator privelege levels.

Microsoft has given up trying to change this culture. Too many programmers assume the users has administrator privileges, and too many users assume they have to run as administrator.

Instead, Longhorn will limit "administrator" access on a per-application basis, and only the apps that the user explicitly authorizes can change system settings. Any unauthorized apps may think they're changing system settings, but are actually running in a sandbox.

"Netscape is shooting for a June beta of "Constellation," the company's next-generation Web client. Constellation is a desktop replacement for Windows that provides an interface called HomePort, a personal workspace. HomePort is "location independent" meaning that a user could log-on to his or her workspace from any machine and get the same desktop interface, complete with bookmarks, shortcuts, and their choice of live feeds."
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/1681 5/16815.html?Ad=1

a quick Google search found this article: http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/1681 5/16815.html?Ad=1

looks like vapourware

I downloaded my first program with BitTorrent a few weeks ago -- a TV show that my VCR failed to record. While doing that, I accidentally clicked on a certain part of the web page. Bingo slammo, my system was infected with spyware, this nasty Aurora and nail.exe
Being a technical guy, familar with the registry, COM, and how windows works, I went about trying to kill this pesky snake. A few hours later, after saying some words I won't repeat here, I decided to wipe the machine and start over (it was a lighly loaded box, so no major loss)
I could have gotten SoftIce and gone into kernal mode to trap this bastard, but it was way beyond my effort vs. reward tolerence level. Spyware has gotten so complicated and sneaky nowadays: to me it is worse of a threat than virsuses ever were.
Now I run double anti-spyware programs in addition to my A/V and firewall. I think that we technical people are also misunderestimating the danger posed by this junk to our own machines.


Run With the Bulls, Swim With the Sharks

I don't know if this is the case with Quicken, but some software is distributed as MSI packages, and those aren't .EXEs. You might have to "runas" msiexec.exe on them. This article might help, dunno.

Been there, done that.

Actually, they dont "call" it that way, they RULE it:
Windows IT article BBC one
Also to your parent, what are you talking about when you say Debian, *BSDs or any other distro dont have that "added value"??? Last time i checked, every distro had its: Word processor, Datasheet processor, image editors, image viewers, instant messagers, web browsers, and some other 15.000 apps (Debians 7 binary CDs tell you something?), if THAT isnt added value, then hit me and call me Martha.

From TFA:

...using ideas gleaned from WMIC, but using the .NET Framework as its core component instead.

I thought there was some concern about M$'s longterm plans for .NET...I did a quick google and couldn't find any real info except this.

I guess they're planning on sticking with it.

With shareware, I haven't put anything up front. If I then like the program after trying it, I can submit payment to get the full version. If I don't like the full or reduced shareware program, I delete it. No money lost on my end.

With XP Home, there is no try before I buy. I put up $200 for the OS (retail version, full), and that's it. Pro retail is $300. Upgrade from Home to Pro is $200. You're out, what $400?

If MS had a step up upgrade, like they intended, I'd be more satisfied with the economics of the situation. But last I checked (and I admit I haven't checked in awhile), they never released a step-up upgrade for Home to Pro. (http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?Ar ticleID=23649&DisplayTab=Article)

Let me repeat it for the hard of understanding here - XP is not a server OS. Yes, you can use it as such, but you'd be a fool. If you want to run a Windows server, use a Windows Server OS. 2003 if you care about continued bug fixes and support, 2000 otherwise.

Of course, you're right, as Microsoft has always made the server version distinctly different than the workstation. (What was the difference back in the NT 4.0 days, two registry entries and an extra thread to make sure you didn't change them?)

I understand and appreciate your point, but the differences between workstation and server versions of MS operating systems tend to be minimal. Of course, there is no XP server. so what do I know... Time to run Server 2003 as my Windows desktop os, I guess...

Generally such programs hinder performance. You don't really want much free physical memory.

See:
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?Art icleID=41095&pg=1

It's Xbox360, which was Xbox, which was Windows 2000, which was Windows NT, which was... VMS. How many VAXMIPS does the X360 run? And where's my DCL interpreter?

The police told me off for not bios-locking my last box.

Interesting... a couple of things come to mind:

1. I've never met a police officer with such a technical mind. I know they exist, but I expect that reporting a crime like a stolen laptop would get me a "so what do you want us to do about it?" and "give us the serial # and we'll keep and eye out for it."

2. I thought BIOS-locking referred to OS-BIOS connections... BIOS Locking: More Intrusive Than WPA. Perhaps you/they meant "BIOS password?"

3. BIOS passwords can be broken, bypassed, or removed quite easily. This is what makes me think that's not what they meant.

Anyways, just some things that went through my head.

I'd heard of the false statements MS made about Novell. In fact, when I first heard managment spreading the rumour, I tracked it down as far as one of the MS consultants, but couldn't go further with it.

You know, the "American People" like to think of themselves as free and, above all, morally upright. You'd think that with behavior like we seen the last 20 years, no one would have any thing to do with MS which stands for lack of freedom and seems to get by only with the help of unethical and occasionally immoral and illegal business practices.

this is from a 1/05 interview between Windows IT Pro magazine and Bob Kruger, vice president of enforcement at the Business Software Alliance (BSA):

Windows IT Pro: If a company isn't cooperative with a request for an audit, does the BSA ever take legal or other action?

Kruger: There have been a number of incidents over the years where we have taken the information directly to a district court judge and applied for a court order that allowed us to go to the company unannounced and in the presence of federal marshals to conduct a surprise audit of its computers.

you can be sure that the guy is soft-pedaling their activities.

and surely you recall microsoft's pre-"Licensing 6.0" scare campaign from a few years ago? where they'd hit a town with ominous print/radio advertising about ponying up for microsoft licenses, then hit some poor schmucks in that town with a BSA audit and get multi-hundred-thousand dollar fines from them, and then play that up in the media as well. these mass-communication campaigns were done in conjunction with mass mailings of coercive-sounding letters to microsoft's corporate "customers" in the particular town that they were targeting.

there were several local stories in these towns in which business owners who refused to allow the audits all said that the BSA returned the next day with federal marshalls.

come on, you have been following IT news for a few years at least? surely that story would have stuck with you?

Yes they would... imagine if someone made a movie about all the companies that Microsoft crushed and stole from, just because they could. I know there is a much, much longer list of little companies who were lured in by Microsoft, had all their ideas stolen, and then cast aside.

I'll start the list.
Stac Electronics
Burst.com
Borland
Caldera over Dr. DOS in UK

This is almost a job for Michael Moore....

It's not a dupe, it's an update! OK, it's a Dupe.

But being a sound, usable design seems to be a minor concern for Apple's product strategy. The big selling point with all iMacs, starting with the original candy iMacs, is that they look cool. Once familiarity has blunted the coolness factor, an iMac design is discarded -- no matter how good it is.

Pretty sad. When the pedestal iMac came out, I rather hoped that competitors would imitate it. Not its overall appearance -- Apple is notoriously intolerant of that kind of imitation. But the more general idea of a pedestal computer. Alas, nobody did, and now even Apple has lost interest in the idea. It's all about branding these days, not usability. And though Apple's designers are the best, they only live to serve that purpose.

What, did they really stop cooking their books after the government told them to stop? (That would certainly be a first!)

My theory is they just didn't cook them quite long enough this quarter.