Slashdot Mirror
The Ideas Behind Longhorn
An anonymous reader writes: "Fortune magazine is carrying an interesting article on the new and improved Bill Gates, as well as some details on Longhorn: 'Because Gates' geeks are completely overhauling the operating system, they'll also have to redesign most of the company's other software products and services to take full advantage, including the MSN online service, its server applications, and especially Microsoft Office, the productivity suite that accounts for nearly a third of the company's sales and profits. If this enormous undertaking succeeds, it will make computers more personal than ever. Equipped with Longhorn, your PC will keep track of how you work, whom you talk to, what sites you look at, how you make documents and whom you share them with, which data on the network are yours--making all those things easier.'"
As I am sure many people will post, do we really want the computer tracking everything we do and everyone we talk to? I am happy that Microsoft is aiming towards better security, but is this new method just leading towards more exploits? Also, one might wonder about compatibility issues if they are talking about redesigning all of their software in order to be more secure.
I've been looking at tieing up nural nets/ heristics and systems components for 4 to 5 years on-and-off.
/. post..
There are two main problems,
1: nural nets/ heristics at a low level slowwww things down.
2: You need a common dictionary/gramma so that evrything at least has a chance to talk to each other.
minor problems are down to initial design.
How the hell do you write the initial networks for you applications?
But if you get it right then,
The file save as dialog for gimp might show text as a available save format because Gimp presents bitmap data
you have an OCR package that can go from bitmap -> text and somthing that can save text files.
All you applications will look and behive the same, and all components are interchangable (so long as they present the write kind of data).
Well that's about it for the
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
This is a unifying technology! It will be fully endorsed by the SPA, RIAA, MPAA, FBI,
This "personal" stuff is just fluff for the real initiative - DRM chips in the HW. Read this article and see for yourselves Infoworld.com .
Sound waves should be free!
Yeah, often not for the better, either, but that's always implied, just like this little beauty was only driven by a little old lady on Sundays. But indirectly, due to my lost patience with the company, I will spend more time with Linux and Open Source, and for the great strides their ridiculous attitudes and poor quality have encouraged in the aforementioned, I do thank them.
The Hook -->> making all those things easier.' (It'll make it easier if it would just not crash and diagnostics agreed with what the system is actually doing, or not doing)
At 135 mph around Sears Point Raceway (soon to be renamed (ugh) Infineon raceway.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
Uh, if "those things" refer to getting the work done, I already have that down pat - once you're over the learning curve, it's done. Vi is vi is vi (unless it's vivivi - the editor of the beast!).
However, it sounds as if "those things" actually refers to something else, namely the ability for some other entity to complete erode my privacy, have unprecidented access to my system (it is mine, like it or not), and leaving me open to unheard of security issues.
Thank you, but I prefer that *I* keep track of how I work, who I talk to, what I look at, how I make *my* documents, and with whom *I* share them. It's not up to the system to decide which data belongs to me since to do so it must analyze my things. To insinuate oneself either personally, or impersonally through the operating system would be simply rude.
You wouldn't tolerate your officemate or the person in the next apartment or even Richard Stallman rifleing through your desk/sock/nightstand drawers. Why should you tolerate it from Microsoft (or Apple, or Sun, or RedHat)?
As if WinXP hasn't already driven me to the brink of insanity with its endless wizards. As if clippy wasn't already annoying enough, now he is gonna be taking steroids. As if my privacy wasn't already being invaded enough. As if Microsoft really needed more marketing data. As if Microsoft was trying really hard to make Windows resemble AOL's interface. As if developers really wanted to learn all new Microsoft APIs.(that never stabilize...) As if computers and their endless changing interfaces didn't annoy people to the point that they just don't try anymore. As if their software wasn't already proprietary enough. As if the rest of the world hadn't already wasted enough time trying to keep up with their ever-changing closed source APIs and protocols.
.NET. As if the world around MS, the endless dreamer on heroine, stopped and waited to see what MS would do next. As if I weren't waiting for them to file for chapter eleven protections in the near future...
As if people were really going to buy into this hook, line, and sinker. As if Longhorn really had a chance to be any more successful at making computers easier to use than any other attempt in history. As if this half-cocked idea will be any more successful than
Russian Russian Russian RussianDollSig DollSig DollSig DollSig
I remember the hoopla that surround the book "1984", when the actual year came around. Its nice to know that BillG has not forgotten the book after all these years. And now with this new initiative from Micro$oft and the chipmakers Intel and AMD, we can finally live out the promise of that story.
I know my first wish is to have Big Brother Gates and his M$ and BSA jack booted thugs knowing everything I do on my computer, not to mention any government agency that wishes it. I know I will be one of the first in line to put my rights in the shredder for a safer, cleaner, more wholesome society. It is nice to see the end of privacy finally arrive and we can finally get on to the business of business. Better late than never, as they say.
I'm fine with my computer tracking what I do and working to anticipate my moves -- this kind of pattern matching is what computers are good for, and we're getting to the point that most of the time we've got the spare cycles lying around. But for any such system there better be two things about it:
Anyone care to lay odds on Microsoft giving me those two items?
Gives AOL/Redhat/Netscape/Winamp/StarOffice 4 years to come up with a secure, free (or free with 1/2/3 year AOL subsciption) Linux solution that installs faster and easier than Windows and handles all NECESSARY functionality of Windows. You've got AOL for the internet services, Redhat for the OS/Admin tools, Netscape for the browser, Winamp 4 "could be" a MS Media Player killer if they wanted it to be, and Star Office 7 could be the MS Office killer.
Hell, I'd sign up for that.
Chris
I'm an opensource kiddie, and I agree with 'If there is a need for it, the open source community will eventually get it out.' On the other hand. The OS will know more about you... this scares me. Yes, it is intended to improve how you use your computer, but damn! Look at the potential risk they are taking with spyware, and crackers obtaining more information about you than you need. With Windows'(tm)(r)(c) current track record with spyware, I don't think I'd even trust a '100% built from the ground up' Windows. I've got a 2kpro workstation here at work. I've got numerous applications from Mcaffe's spam stopper to Adaware, and I still manage to get spam, and ugly ads I cant get rid of. Adware removes atleast 3 cookies(etc) a day. Then again, MS could do an unbelievable job on Longhorn and make it a tight, stable, and secure OS that is still packed with functionality. So I guess I'm just gonna sit back and see what happens. =)
P.S. Yeah, I tend to bash MS often, but they aren't 100% wrong 100% of the time. They do make some nice products.
Can all fish swim?
Anyone know of any old used Y2K bunkers that are up for sale?
Your Servant, B. Baggins
Perhaps it's that slashdot users hate the perceived anti-competitive attitude that pervades everything Microsoft does. Not withstanding their apparent desire to improve their OS, the latest attempts at breaking interoperability with Linux do nothing to dispel that perception.
Tools need to be deterministic. A tool that works only 90% of the time is useless. Imagine a brake pedal that brakes only 90% of the time because it has somehow figured out that there have in the past been situations where you did not actually mean to brake.
A computer that is not deterministic is not a good tool. If you can only copy a file 90% of the time because of arbitrary restrictions, then it is no longer a reliable copying machine.
Of course it will be possible to buy a license that will allow you to operate a computer proper. Nobody will think this strange, after all, nearly all professional fields require some kind of certification. Nobody will stop to think that this is a lot like a scribe having to buy a license before he can buy a pen that will do a Mickey Mouse drawing.
You say:
"Windows gives you flexibility? Try moving your Outlook contacts from Outlook to Groupwise some time. Yes, that is in your own words the definition of flexibility."
That is BILL GATES' definition of flexibility, theoretically coming in Longhorn. That's the way it should work in my mind, so yeah, I would say that's flexibility.
Are you trying to tell me you can freely move your adress book from any mail client under Linux to any other? While I'm sure you could find some examples where this is true, it is certainly not guaranteed. If each program uses their only proprietary format, you certainly can't do it. How does Linux help you in this respect? Windows is no better of course, but that's an application-level problem, not an OS problem. MS is trying to remedy it at the OS level so that the applications don't have to be concerned with it. Sounds like a reasonable idea to me.
And your right incidentally, my usage of Linux is limited to server applications, and I don't claim to be any super-knowledgable Linux geek. I can set up and administer some relatively basic web-related services and do some fairly simple development chores, but I don't get down into the bowls of the OS on a regular basis.
Then you said:
"Quick, think: Where is that user's address book stored right now? Is it in "Documents and settings", under "Local Data" or "Applications"? Is it in the Windows directory under profiles? Is it in some folder named after some GUID?
Now, quick, think: Where is the user's address book in linux? Well, it's definitely in their HOME Directory. What e-mail program are they using? Evolution? I'll bet it's in a folder called ~/evolution."
This is a common problem with Linux advocates. You say something like that as if everyone should know it. Indeed, anyone with a little bit of Linux experience would be thinking along the same lines. But since I use Windows 95% of the time I know precisely where to go to find my address book. It's a question of familiarity, not necasserily a question of better design. If you understand the philosophy behind the My Documents paradigm under Windows, it's just as clear as a user's Home directory under Linux (note that I'm not agreeing with the vision, I personally do not use My Documents unless some particular program won't allow me not to, which is a gripe in and of itself!).
And then you can go to the extreme that MS is going to... Why should I CARE where my address book is stored? I'm using an application that accesses it, that application has to know where it is, not me. Therefore, if it's stored out on the net somewhere and I can access it from my PocketPC the same way I access it on the desktop, that's a very powerful paradigm shift.
I'm not necasserily chearing about this, I'm as considered with the security implications at anyone, but to deny the power of the model means you (or anyone else) probably doesn't see the full picture.
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
You mean, "Program Files/Publisher/Program" don't you? At least, for the ones that do install there - I still encounter programs that install in c:/.
I just love having to remember the publisher when looking for an App!! Sure you can usually change it but that is the default location, indeed the SANCTIONED location.
I really like how OSX handles this better, letting me set up (and alter!!) the structure of my applciations directory at will. Programs are just moved around, no install/deinstall just because I'd like it to live on a different drive.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It's an excuse to openly defy the court. Another doomsday plan. Brinksmanship. "You have to choose between either letting us eat up the rest of every industry one by one- or intentionally destroy poor us by sabotaging this stuff that we've bet the company on! Are you ready for that?"
This reeks of doomsday plan. Like hell they don't learn- that's been working OK for them so far. The question is, since MS must inevitably over-reach and collapse (when they pick a 'bet the company' plan that's too extreme, and call the world's bluff with it), when would be a good time for them to blow a gasket? They _can't_ continue this tactic forever without becoming the most wild exaggeration of every rabid slashdotter's worst nightmare. And, like Stalin said of the Pope, 'how many divisions does he have?' Microsoft is not prepared for a serious conflict with, say, a country, in the event of a power struggle, which is the ultimate destination of this sort of thing.
I daresay the bigwigs at MS have exit strategies, though. Or, and this is a disturbing thought- maybe they don't. Maybe their world really IS an elevator with no top floor, and no down button. If so, they are destined for great disappointment. Everything ends.