Slashdot Mirror
Set Your Watches For the End of Windows XP
An anonymous reader writes "In one year today exactly, Microsoft will shut down support for Windows XP. The deadline will prove a challenge for many of Australia's largest users of IT, all struggling to migrate to new Microsoft environments." Net Applications' chart of current OS market share figures shows XP only slightly behind Windows 7, even now.
.. where people finally say:
"I'd rather have software that works than software that's supported?"
Because it's about time.
Perhaps some will struggle to migrate to a non-Microsoft environment and avoid the recurrence of this particular struggle next time.
XP will no longer be "supported" but it will certainly still be used by 10's of millions of computers a year from now (and two, and three, and more). It's also a certainty that a stationary "unsupported" target will get a lot of attention by exploits and black hats.
XP -> 7 is entirely worth it. I'm no IT professional and don't know the logistics of it all but when I upgraded it was like day and night. I really don't understand the slow uptake to 7. Laziness? XP to Vista I understand, Vista was a pile of poopy fart poops. But 7 is a breeze and if I may boldly say in my experience even more reliable than XP. Of course, I could be letting the odd obscure legacy program go over my head but still... 7. 7 7 7 7 7. Did I mention 7?
You can dance if you want to.
I have never heard of anyone doing this.
OK, it's become a joke now, but seriously, if we get our act together, we can have a viable replacement for XP for people who just want to browse, email, skype, google, play music, and the like. That's 90% of what people do.
Yeah, line-of-business apps. Except that people don't run those at home.
Even though I like Unity (the LTS version, not the braindead initial versions), I'd have to say a classic Mint desktop is likely to be more familiar to an XP refugee.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
WinXP won't die. There is not a good replacement.
Take a look, Windows 8 is less than Windows Vista.
This really means the classic looks of windows 98 used in enterprises will be gone for ever.
Why not continue this story with further 'count down' stories?
ANYTHING to push another MS related post to the FP. Every day/week. We can't live here at /. without MS stories!
Has there been a new Microsoft related post today?
Of course!
Let's all celebrate proprietary monopolies!
Let's replace the Microsoft logo, which used to be a Borg logo, with a friendly Care Bear with the Windows logo on his chest! Let's market these toys so we all have Microsoft Care Bears on us all of the time - with bluetooth! When we rub his belly a beam shoots across the room to the latest Slashdot story about another Microsoft news or not news happening!
Dell and HP should sell out to MS: Why not own the OEMs?
Finally:
Spanish Linux users launch legal challenge to Microsoftâ(TM)s secure boot
@ http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/view/31499/spanish-linux-users-launch-legal-challenge-to-microsofts-secure-boot/
@@ http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/view/24199/rsa-2012-malware-gets-the-boot-in-windows-8-notes-charney
@@ http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/26/us-microsoft-eu-idUSBRE92P0E120130326
@@ http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Secure-Boot-complaint-filed-against-Microsoft-1830714.html
@@ http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2013-000162&language=EN
@@ http://www.hispalinux.es/node/758
@@@ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/51329950/ns/business-us_business/t/exclusive-open-software-group-files-complaint-eu-against-microsoft/
@@@ http://newyork.newsday.com/business/technology/microsoft-target-of-hispalinux-open-source-software-users-in-complaint-to-eu-1.4909950
@@@ http://www.mobilenapps.com/articles/8058/20130327/linux-users-file-complaint-against-microsoft-over-secure-boot-windows.htm
@@@ http://rcpmag.com/articles/2013/04/01/spanish-complaint-windows-8-secure-boot.aspx
@@@ http://www.eitb.com/en/news/technology/detail/1297786/hispalinux-microsoft--hispalinux-files-complaint-microsoft/
Lock yourself in, boys! (At the BIOS level) We're in for a heck of a ride!
Mark me troll because you know it's true and you enjoy lying to yourself.
"LOOKS LIKE MEAT IS BACK ON THE MENU, BOYS!"
The logo for MS should be a plate of Soylent Green and a rainbow behind it.
That's when you'll pry XP from me and my corporate cronies.
I don't know of anyone who has ever received support from MS, personal, corporate or any other kind. The closest you get to receiving support is spending entire days waiting on hold. I conclude that MS support is a myth spread for purposes of PR.
Shutting down a mythical service is a very good idea. It's pointless to waste money on something that doesn't exist.
I have a couple potential takers already. Microsoft really messed up with Windows 8 because people are really looking for alternatives. It's been nice to have people ask, "What other choices do I have?"
It strikes me that there's a niche here for someone to offer similar support once MS drops XP. Just as there are any number of aftermarket suppliers for auto parts, I can imagine companies that will serve up regular security updates, compatibility patches, and similar goodies for a price.
If your company runs a couple thousand XP boxes, what kind of annual subscription would you be willing to pay to keep them going?
Three Squirrels
According to the these numbers, all version of Windows add up to a... 91.86 market share? Good gawd!
What other choices do I have?
Mac's are light years ahead of Ubuntu and Ubuntu is moving backwards. There's only one realistic answer to that question.
It's only logical that they lose all property 'rights' to it.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I already took the plunge as a small business owner to Windows 8, and will be upgrading to blue when released!
...to set my clock back to when XP was ended on my side
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
More a sign that the world is abandoning Microsoft.
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT): Windows 8 Has Failed, Now What?
The rise of tablets and smartphones has shaken up the once dominant “Wintel” PC paradigm. In an attempt to re-establish its supremacy, Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT) designed Windows 8 to be a hybrid operating system, useful on a variety of platforms.
But Windows 8 adoption has been poor -- consumers seem baffled by the changes. Meanwhile, Windows tablets are selling poorly, and Windows Phone remains in fourth place.
http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/microsoft-corporation-msft-windows-8-has-failed-now-what-110483/
In your nerd dreams will that happen. Not trolling, I'm trying to ground you into reality.
Actually Windows 95 is becomming secure because it is so obscure and limited that most current attacks are unable to run on it. Attacks that used to run on it are pretty much dead, much like Stoned for DOS is now officially no longer a threat to anyone. I remember seeing the article about a year ago, so sorry no current link to the story.
The truth shall set you free!
Well, I don't think our work site will be ready. We haven't started migrating off of XP yet and we still have systems running NT 4. I wonder how this matches up with our government mandate that we be moving to IPv6. HA!
An even better question they should be asking is "What other choices WILL I have?". Obvious to some, it is becoming more obvious to the masses that Microsoft has no intention of backing down from what it has done with Windows 8. Windows 9/10/11 etc, will be more of the same if not worse.
What options will you have 10 years from now when you need to do a critical desktop computing oriented task - tasks such as spread sheets and word processing that were what brought about the revolution in personal computing in the first place - but there are no more desktops because Microsoft killed them all?
1. Copy is incredibly slow now. It does a 'calculating' step which is insanely slow.
2. I dragged a shortcut from the desk to the bin, and waited and waited and waited.... WTF is that, it takes forever to delete something?
3. Copy big hundred meg files to flash, decide its too slow, cancel, says 'cancelling'.... but still goes on and on and on. Looks like they can't even cancel part way through a large file??? (programmer is a moron)
4. Interface similar.
5. 'Set as Desktop image' in context menu next to Preview, causes repeated accidental porn desktops.
6. Doesn't work with my network, can't figure out why it can't see shares and refuses to talk to the network printer.
On the plus side,
Viewing folders as large tiles is nice.
erm, faster startup is nice, I'm struggling already. Snap I guess is nice, but I only use it to maximize, which was already a button on XP.
Night and day? No, it's a minor incremental upgrade with a few issues. I view you as an astroturfer from your comment. I notice that when 7 came out, and Vista had failed, you guys all switched to dissing Vista, as if you couldn't make 7 good, so you pretended Vista stunk. The reality is neither OS really adds much. They're both minor tweaks and it just isn't worth doing an upgrade for tweaks.
My Canon scanner didn't support Windows 7, I had to get a new one. Upgrades always are a pain.
I got 7 because it came with the computer, my XP computer was nearing its end (disk problems, SD card reader was way old and didn't read SDHC, I'd forgotten it even had a fax modem, 100mbps network etc. old hardware). But I don't think Windows 7 is much different from XP. I think people aren't bothering to upgrade a working computer and Windows 7 isn't an improvement enough to make them.
Now that Windows 8 is out, well, I guess you turfers will be telling us Windows 9 is fantastic, and 8 stunk in the not too distant future.
ReactOS might be able to drum up some commercial support now. It's a fine concept, that's if it doesn't get smashed by MS.
^^this.
If you're still running 16bit DOS, your machines are highly malware resistant today. I know of no virus or malware circulating currently that will infect your machine.
Yes, ReactOS! :]
If you don't like the direction Ubuntu is moving, try Mint instead. I have a machine on Ubuntu for the same reason many people have Windows XP. It runs their favorite aps and there are no binaries for Mint for many packages yet. I'm also running Mint and loving it.
It is easier to set up network printers in Ubuntu. It's easier to get Jack and synths working in Mint. Sorry Ubuntu Studio, you crash Jack on my hardware. Both run Audacity fine. Mint has trouble running RoseGarden. Installed it but can't find it in the menu.
Not everything works OK on Windows without tweaks either, so the above minor issues are not a showstopper. It runs my aps without flooding the desktop with ads and trialware, the biggest timewasters in Windows. Windows is clogged to death out of the box.
The truth shall set you free!
As Microsoft trumps on with its Modern UI strategy, I expect Macs to increase in popularity among those who still respect a classic desktop experience.
Indeed, the year of the Linux desktop was 2011/2012. Some of us just didn't notice because the GUI was neither Gnome nor KDE, but Android. By 1014 people will be buying more Android devices than Windows devices.
"Is an Android device a computer?", you might ask. An Vista machine with a dual core 1.3 GHz processor and a GB of RAM is always counted as a computer, so I see no reason why a machine with the same specs running Linux, Android or any other distribution, isn't also a computer. So the way I see it, there's soon to be more Linux computers than Windows computers. They're just a lot more portable than we expected.
I've got a dual boot Mint/OS X laptop.
When I want to do Apple dev I'm stuck using OS X.
For everything else I always choose Mint.
Mint 14 with Cinnamon is a thing of beauty.
I pity da fool using anything else.
It's called the iPad
If you choose to throw away your money and your freedom. You could also pay 1/5th as much for a similar Android device for the same use case.
They are resistant to the average malware. They are not resistant to a targetted attack from a hacker practiced in social engineering, and sufficiently skilled to look up one of the old exploits, or to write their own trojan.
Does Windows 95 even run on modern hardware? I remember that getting Windows 98 SE to work in a virtual machine was a pain in the ass even after I found a floppy image that worked (b/c Microsoft in their infinite wisdom didn't or couldn't make a bootable CD image back in the day) because it didn't recognize any of the VM hardware and everything barely worked at the lowest-common-denominator level. For instance, the best video support I could get was 16-color 640x480 (i.e. absolute shit). Forget about sound or network access. I'm guessing the only reason why the Win98 installer found the blank hard disk file at all is because VMware was propping everything up and making it work behind the scenes. Hell, you couldn't install Win95 on a brand new PC without resorting to some kind of USB boot disk trickery because most new machines don't even have floppy drives anymore.
"It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
Wait until Microsoft tries to force everyone to move to Windows 8.
Cheers,
Dave
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
If only Microsoft would encourage feedback from uses, and act on them.
I have collected a long list of bugs and annoyances with Win7 which I really wish that M/S was interested in.
Where to send my list to?
Or against a guy with a tank and an RPG...
The hackers at NSA know a thousand times as much about computer security than either of us. They, the best in world, choose Linux.
This isn't supring given the history of the systems. Linux was a copy of Unix, a networked multi-user system where it was essential that one user couldn't mess with anything which would effect another user. The approach is that the "bad guy" might be an authorized user of the system, and yet they still shouldn't be able to break the system. Microsoft, on the other hand, always focused on PERSONAL computers, based on the local disk, not the network. Security wasn't a priority for the design of Windows, games were more important, resource usage (cost) was more important, eyc.
If you want to think that Windows is "better" you can focus on the number of games available, or on narrowly tailored industry-specific software, etc. There ARE a number of advantages to Windows, in certain use cases. Pretending that security is one of those is like claiming that Canada has nicer weather than Hawaii - it's just so ridiculous it makes you look like a fool. It makes much more sense to focus on what really IS better about Windows.
(Even better would be to mature beyond the fanboi-ism and learn about the strengths of many differemt platforms and use the right tool for the job. That's why so many different platforms exist and I have four different OSes in my office - because each tool is suited to a different job.)
Windows 98 does. I have one for running OLD games, under VMware Fusion.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
More like "too lazy" to migrate.
On the upside, this year might FINALLY be the year of the Linux Desktop! *hides*
Let's all switch to ReactOS when Windows drops XP support.
Isn't that project not only alive, but getting a bit of a government assist in Russia?
Why don't IT departments just toss some money into that pot, too, as a speculative investment toward NEVER buying MS again? The ROI is insanely high. Take the whole Fortune 500, each tossing USD 1,000,000.00 (a fraction of the MS upgrade cycle costs), and you could get a REALLY good clone of XP.
Oh sure, as soon as Ubuntu can support in-house developed MS Access databases and ODBC to MS Exchange server! Windows is easy to replace, so long as you have no business apps.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
With Windows 7, Microsoft finally made it work. They developed the Static Driver Verifier, which uses proof of correctness techniques to insure that drivers won't crash the operating system, and made everybody run their drivers through it before they were signed. That eliminated about half of all crashes. Anything else was Microsoft's fault, and they knew it.
Microsoft also developed an internal tool that takes in crash dumps and matches them to other crash dumps. This made it possible to digest a huge number of crash dumps and tie them back to the cause.
With those tools, Microsoft finally had the ability to make the thing work. And they did. Windows 7 is much more reliable than previous versions of Windows.
Then, having finally produced a solid desktop system, they found they were being clobbered by the tablet industry, and came out with a desktop interface borrowed from a phone. Sigh.
Yes, first he has to mail the troijan he wrote and hope the other end will insert the odd floppy they got in mail labeled "Free porn inside" to their dos box.
It will keep working just as well on the same hardware as it is now. Who is really calling MS asking Win XP questions ?
What options will you have 10 years from now when you need to do a critical desktop computing oriented task - tasks such as spread sheets and word processing that were what brought about the revolution in personal computing in the first place - but there are no more desktops because Microsoft killed them all?
First, you can use pirated copies. They exist for all Windows versions. If a version is not sold anymore, and the current version doesn't do what you need to do, then at least you have an ethical excuse for running a pirated copy. It's not a lost sale to MS because you will not buy their tablet OS for serious work.
There is no "second," actually. If the software doesn't work on Win2012 for one reason or another then you have no option at all. Either the ISV is gone out of business; or they decided to discontinue the product; or their roadmap does not include what you need (Hi, Xilinx!) or, the simplest of them all, the upgrade just costs too much and you cannot afford it.
There will still be desktop operating systems. They just might not be from Microsoft.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Perfectly true ^^
No one can pretend to be safe from a targeted attack. Worst case: "they" sneak into your house, and when physical access is granted⦠well, game over. Off topic, sry.
To increase your video's watcher you just had to visit Authentic Views
And that answer is: Use Debian stable!
Yup - you won't get the latest and newest software, but that does not matter for people that just browse the internet, do some mailing, write some occasional letters and do some graphic/photo stuff (about 90% of the user population).
For some more work (adding a repository) you can have the up-to-date Firefox version.
Don't talk about difficult installations, because if someone is capable to install XP he/she/it is absolutely capable to install Debian. And those people not capable of installing any OS are also not capable installing anything newer.
There are several reasons not to upgrade to a "higher" windows version. The main reason though is simple: hardware. Most computers happily running XP going to struggle to run Windows 7. I am not saying it won't run, but it will be a slow an painful experience in a lot of cases. Secondly - a lot of hardware is no longer supported by Windows 7 (think about printers, scanners, video cards etc.). Most people will upgrade, but don't want to replace all the hardware stuff also, because that's expensive. And - talking about expensive... The replacement of XP by Debian is a (software-wise) zero-cost option.
A lot of software that they are used to will run happily under wine (except some exotic software that has to access your hardware directly). Newer versions that won't run under wine probably won't run under Windows XP either. So wine takes care about 99% of the user software that only runs under Windows.
And - last but not least.. You have a rock solid working environment, with no headaches about virus/malware. An environment that's patched when needed, and not only once every month. An environment that's supported for a long time and won't give any trouble with validations and that kind of nonsense.
Or a tanked guy playing an RPG...
That's because VM's removed support for Win9x virtual hardware some ages ago.
Basically there are now four groups of VM systems
"Enterprise" - Which is VMWare - which uses as much hardware trickery as possible (instructions in the CPU for virtualization) and requires underlying hardware to support it. This is what your "cloud" hardware is supposed to run on. These are used for thin-client servers, and other mostly-windows intranet services.
Para-virtualization - Which is mostly Xen - which uses whatever hardware is available, CPU-assisted or not and relies on the host operating system having paravirtualization drivers. Parallels and VMWare come with PV type drivers for Windows XP and later however much older versions of of VMWare used to emulate SVGA and Sound Blaster hardware in order to allow Windows 3.x and Win95 to work along with some games.
Dynamic recompliation - which is what is done to emulate game console hardware like the PSX/PS2/N64/GC/Wii on another architecture. See also Rosetta for OS X. These emulators may take advantage of 3D hardware on the host, or they may opt to do it all in software to be more accurate.
Direct emulation - Dosbox, most NES/SNES emulators, MAME and MESS, may also include some Apple II,C64 and Amiga emulators. Where all the hardware is emulated as accurately as possible, without using any of the underlying hardware. In some cases (such as trying to emulate 3DFX hardware, Roland MT-32, and some other "was rare at the time" parts like Tandy/PCjr color/sound parts) the emulator is too accurate to specifications and has to emulate bugs.
A great example of what DosBox is not, is that it's not meant to emulate Win95, but people still try to.
I repeat, the major difference between four groups above is specifically what they are trying to emulate. The first two groups are trying to use one machine to run more than one operating system of the same architecture, while the latter two are trying to use one machine to run one machine of a different architecture.
The difference between the last two is that dynamic recompilation targets exactly one architecture and makes use of whatever acceleration technology may exist on the host system, while the direct (or brute force) method tries to emulate a machine *and operating system* that can accommodate all software that was developed for that machine without having to deal with a lot of the quirky behavior the original MSDOS exhibited. Hence why you aren't supposed to run Win95 on it, because it can't replace the emulators Dos-emulation with Win95's DOS7.
Right now there's actually three divides in trying to play old games:
- Games for which the hardware no longer exists (eg DOS/SoundBlaster, Amiga) in which mostly can be done with DosBOX.
- Games which were designed to run on a specific version of Windows (eg Japanese Windows, Win95) and can not run on Windows XP or later due to there no longer being a 256 color mode or expectation of a non-unicode system. Games like the original Starcraft, some early Win95 Sierra games like QFG5 and KQ8, and countless japanese PC98 games fall under this.
- Games which utilized a DRM scheme that doesn't work on newer versions of windows. Two programs that I know do this are the bleem! (which will not work on any OS newer than Win98) and Ultima 9 (Which you had to crack the copy protection in order to play on Windows 2000/XP)
Like if there is any reason not to support DRM, it's that Ultima 9 case. This game had not been re-relased for 12 years http://www.gog.com/gamecard/ultima_9_ascension , and likely had more to do with EA pulling the pursestrings on Origin than anything else. I'm sure there's plenty of other games that used the same copy protection that also didn't get a re-release after Windows XP.
As it happens, Office 2008 for Mac ends support after this next Patch Tuesday. But there has been only one exploit that I know of that affect x86 Office 2008 for Mac, and none affecting any PowerPC version.
But Microsoft Windows XP Professional for Embedded Systems will continue to be sold until December 2016. It's the same codebase, just with different licence conditions. Will Microsoft actually stop releasing security updates for a product they're still selling? Will they keep developing security updates for Windows XP but withhold them from non-embedded customers?
It's not exactly rocket surgery.
I've switched all my friends and aquaintances who had expiring Windows XP installations to Ubuntu real quickly. It sucks, too, but less then Windows 8. And it's free. I won't pay my buck to jerks who leave me standing in the rain after some years, when casual users just begin to getting aquainted to their PC.
Okay these user should probably be looking at counseling, because "get burned on support and bilked on upgrade costs, and then still buy their next product because you see no way out" sounds like the IT equivalent of an abusive relationship.
I'm still woundering what will happen to the activation server after that day... If they let them running, a lot of users will stay with xp until the end of time...
if they want to disable them, there will be a class action suit before the windows server will have had time to shutdown...
for January 19, 2038. Because that's when Windows XP stops working
About two years ago my WinXP SP3 stopped updating. The update would start but went into grinding never coming to an end. It was actually a widespread problem at the time, apparently a bug on Microsoft's side, apparently fixed by Microsoft after a while. I tried plenty of suggestions, nothing helped, as of today my system does not update. I never bothered to reinstall from scratch.
So what? You go on the Net without administrative rights, Javascript is disabled and you can relax. But those exploits that attack you anyway? Well, I infected my machine intentionally with a boot virus. I collected information running WinXP under the virus. Then I booted into Ubuntu and had a look at \Windows\System32 to see the intruders. Essentially, I neutralised the infection by hand although in the end I restored the partition anyway.
That's putting it a bit too strong. The desktop is still there and works just fine in Win8. The metro stuff works well for some things and can be ignored the rest of the time. Storage Spaces, File History, and account syncing make up for any pain imo.
My parents have a PC running XP. Its spec is to low to install windows 7 or vista. Looks like they'll either have to fork out some money for a new PC or else put up with the virus threat. Another point I thought of. If the spec for later versions of windows is higher does this not then mean that they run will slower compared to ealier versions of windows? So even if they could update they would be getting a worse performance. I think a lot of the people with the older version of windows are going to be oldies who have no idea about how to update windows or install linux as an alternative.
Why?
Now I do not run Windows except for VMs. [1] But I remember that when XP was first released MS tried to calm some fears by saying that at end of life they would release a work around for WGA so that those who suddenly find themselves with machines that need verification would not be left out of the cold.
Now we get see if they keep their word.
[1] The point is that I no longer understand WGA intimately.
Firewall, Emet, mitigate services. turn them off, make them on demand, etc.,
Set your IE security sliders all the way up, set WUauserv and BITS to Disabled
Filter out frame, iframe, xframe, keep; your passwords in keepass, clone your OS drive.
Fuck upgrading.
The organisation I work for just migrated all staff computers to a new red-orange-green support system. This included complete re-installs of computers.... With clean installs XP. When asked why they didn't install W7 and not have to worry about upgrading all computers next year and inconvenience thousands of users again, they simply said "one step at a time".
Apple is FAR less secure and Windows.
http://www.dailytech.com/Apples+OS+X+is+First+OS+to+be+Hacked+at+This+Years+Pwn2Own/article21097.htm
If it ain't broke, don't fix it! :) I can understand why XP users are reluctant to move forward, beside the obvious cash implications.
But, truth is, Windows 7 is way better, especially with all the updates.
I've been waffling a long time on which way to invest in upgrading my pc's. win 7 or 8? I like 7's stability and am not excited about metro, but don't want to have to pay the Microsoft tax too soon again. I finally made a decision.
I bought a Mac. Arrives tomorrow.
Yes, it will be more expensive over time. At least the upgrades are priced half what windows are.
With OS X 10.7.3 the ability to effectively sandbox applications with a diverse permissions system for access was made part of OSX. Using this system became mandatory to distribute as part of Apple's App Store. Most OSX applications meet the sandboxing / 10.7.3 requirements.
Obviously there are a lot of exceptions. But those are often applications which are brand names from well known developers. And remember that Apple as of 10.8 also has centralized code signing.
I suspect we are already in a situation where almost all OSX users have 95%+ of their applications either sandboxed or from a large brand name developer. Within a few years I expect that number to be higher. I also expect that Apple will get better at large applications installing complex sandboxing and push that percentage further up.
I managed to get Win95 running under Virtual PC 2004 a few years ago (support for an elderly piece of software then-considered business critical by my employers) but it was a royal PITA under the machines we had then - which, IIRC, were P4s at between 2 and 2.5GHz. Virtualisation has come on significantly and so may make that a more tenable option, but aside from getting an old P2 box down from the attic I don't think I'd be easily able to get W95 to run on modern hardware directly.
Win98 is flakey, but is a lot more tolerant. Still quite useful for running some of the older DirectX (7? 8?) games which don't play too well under XP+
Re. boot CDs, the El Torino standard didn't come out until 1996-ish, so Win95 never had a bootable CD as far as I can recall. On the other hand, bootable discs became more popular during the 98 days and somewhere at home I have a bootable CD which I assembled many moons ago, from which the three variants of 95, and the two variants of 98, could be installed.
Please excuse minor inaccuracies - all of the above is quoted from memory.
We don't need XP patches, since we all will rely on the AntiVir and Trojan programs being constantly updated to stop any problems when using XP.
Even though it's currently supported by Microsoft, Windows XP isn't safe to use. Why? No ASLR or other exploit mitigation techniques. When vulnerabilities are found in the apps that you're using, being on the XP platform makes you a sitting duck.
Then, having finally produced a solid desktop system, they found they were being clobbered by the tablet industry, and came out with a desktop interface borrowed from a phone. Sigh
If you use Windows 8 in a desktop mode, can you enumerate all the differences between it and Win7? I used Win8 for a while just having my most common apps "pinned" on the task bar, but eventually also installed a new Start button. I am unable to see any difference between my current setup and my previous Windows 7 setup. I do notice the performance improvements though. The Start Screen is to me just another application, and a rather interesting one at that, since it gives me all the "other" information I consume day-to-day at a single glance. Weather, Stock portfolio performance, number of unread emails, latest tweets, unread articles on /. etc, all in one single glance.
I do not know of a single area where Win8 is worse than Win7, and it is better in quite a few. I am open to input that would alter this perception.
^^this.
If you're still running 16bit DOS, your machines are highly malware resistant today. I know of no virus or malware circulating currently that will infect your machine.
If you're running DOS you're not going to be connected to the internet, so unless a Russian cybermastermind sends you a free floppy disk full of ASCII porn in the post, how are you going to get infected anyway?
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Hell, you couldn't install Win95 on a brand new PC without resorting to some kind of USB boot disk trickery because most new machines don't even have floppy drives anymore.
Floppy drives? I'm sure you will be hard pressed trying to find a Core2duo era motherboard with a floppy controller. New Ivy Bridge boards don't even have IDE controllers any more.
Unicode in Slashdot
What you would do is you don't grant that permission at all. Instead the applications has to get permission on a file by file basis to files outside its sandbox.
I agree with you, and I've been explaining this system to other Slashdot users to disprove their claim that it's impossible to create a security model that properly secures a file system from trojans. But under such a system, how would an application gain enough permission to "Compress all files in a folder that the user selected"? How would an application gain enough permission to "Search all files on the SD card for a particular phrase"?
It is about time...
No - just that yet again MS produced a crap version of Windows. *If* history repeats itself, then Windows 9 will be considerably better than Windows 8
They are resistant to the average malware. They are not resistant to a targetted attack from a hacker practiced in social engineering, and sufficiently skilled to look up one of the old exploits, or to write their own trojan.
So what? No system is resistant to things like that.
I forget: can LibreOffice's database product run commercial off-the-shelf software written in VBA for Microsoft Access? I worked for a company that depended on something called Stone Edge.
also have the vista mess financial turmoil is part of that (likely the part of dell and others pushing MS to let them put the sticker on the lower end system that where to slow to run vista)
But UAP was also to much in vista as well. 7 toned it down a bit.
A user can install and update applications into his own folder.
On Debian and Ubuntu, that appears to work only for compiling and installing applications from source, as only root can install .deb packages. Or is that a problem of Debian packaging that other distributions have fixed?
For example most Linux applications can be installed in a user's home directory
How so? I thought only root could install an application from a package because applications are packaged to assume installation into a system-wide directory, not into a user's home directory. Are you assuming installation from source?
In one of the very few moments when my bosses have actually listened to and heeded my words, we've maintained policy for the last year that any used computers sold have to be able to migrate to Windows Vista, 7, or 8. So I've made sure all machines are over 1GHz (shrug) and can carry at least 512MB of RAM. In general most of the used machines we re-sell range between 1.5 - 3.0GHz and 1-4GB of RAM. That's fine for our customers but in a year we're not going to be able to activate fresh XP installs and we still haven't "migrated" ourselves to an OEM copy of Vista, 7, or 8. It's a non-profit company -- does anybody know how we can get ahold of a multi-license or multi-seat license and copy of any of the newer windows for dirt cheap or next to nothing? Oh, yeah. And the "Christian-oriented" non-profit business discriminates against sexual orientation, so Microsoft's direct charity will refuse to help.
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
Microsoft had a proper security model for ages even before [Windows XP] was released.
Except this proper security model wasn't enabled by default. New accounts defaulted to administrator, not limited user, and there was no concept of a "sudoer", or a limited user who can gain permission to perform an action through a relatively secure user interface. Windows Vista introduced UAC, which emulated sudo, and Windows 7 refined it.
Teracopy
From the link: $19.95. That's one-fifth of the way to a Windows 8 personal use license. If it takes payware to add all your favorite Windows 7/8 features to Windows XP, and five pieces of payware cost as much as a Windows 8 personal use license, why keep the Windows XP?
XP is much lighter-weight
I've read that if you have even 1 GB of RAM in a machine, Windows 7/8 is more efficient at using it for caching the disk than Windows XP ever was. What payware do you plan to add to Windows XP to make it more efficient at caching the disk?
If someone singles you out as target, you need more than just a patched up OS. A serious firewall would be a good start.
[Social engineering is] portable across any operating system that isn't locked down to only run authorised code.
"Authorized" by whom? I'd appreciate a little clarification of your opinion. Do you believe the owner of a computer should have the power to make his own certificate for that computer and use it to digitally sign software to run on that computer? If not, is he still the owner?
But that also means that all those insecure apps they are using on XP won't be allowed to work the way they expect to when they move to WIndows 7.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I kicked and screamed when I was forced to accept Windows 8 on my new laptop by Best Buy, and it was all for nothing. I, too, see Windows 8 as a major improvement over Windows 7.
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
It can't happen too soon for me. Hopefully Microsoft will keep their word and issue a legal, universal activation code when XP goes unsupported. Then I'll never have to switch over to the bloat and convoluted security model of NT6.
I'll deal with security myself, thanks. My only concern about XP is the eventual arrival of hardware that it can't handle.
Now the next question is what about something for which there isn't a system support. Like a new compression algorithm. In the case the whole thing works the other way around. The new compression algorithm dynamic code installs as an extension to Finder, that is it grants Finder permission to use it as a way to compress. Then the application makes a request to Finder to use that compression algorithm.
So what about things other than compression? Does Spotlight's API allow a search program to add specific ways to specify what sort of "needle" to search for, such as regular expressions or language-specific stemming or synonym resolution mechanisms? Does Spotlight's API allow a search program to add support for searching text in specific file formats? Windows, in fact, is going the other way: Windows 8 flat out removed the concept of an "indexing service" from the operating system.
You mentioned trusted wrapper programs for archiving and search. How would an application add more categories of service that the operating system's publisher hadn't thought of, such as file comparison, the sort of continuous background file synchronization that happens using something like Dropbox, and the sort of file synchronization that happens using version control software?
the only problem with Win9 being better then 8 is the "so low bar" that 8 created. Simply put 8 is crap so anything that is so damn stinky will certainly be an improvement even when more invasive.
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
Still managed to get a bluescreen with Win7 at work first day it has been deployed :-)
If I recall correctly, BIOSes that could boot from CD-ROM did not exist when Win 98 was released, it was at least a very very new and fancy feature at that time.
I seriously can not wait to give a "Sorry, unsupported" response when people too stubborn to update wonder why they can't get newer software working.
Shutting down XP in favor of 8 is the equivalent of gradually choking off private insurance for single-payer Long live Windows 7.
Nope, there's no such thing as a Z77 board with PATA and Floppy
I used Windows 2000 for about 10 years after MS dropped support.
You're really bad at this. I had Windows 95 OSR 2.1 running in a VM just last week, fully functional. Sound, video, net, the whole shebang.
98SE was vastly easier.
And yes, I commented last week that the VM is probably one of the most secure stations in the building. IE 3.0 won't run shit.
The preceding comment is my own, and in no way construes an opinon of the Emperor of Mankind.
The differences are: 1: The start button is invisible in win8 (but in the same default place; bottom left corner) 2: The start menu is fullscreen, and incorporates the idea of gadgets from win vista/7. For most users, that's the difference.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Win98SE runs just fine in VMware Workstation, hardest part was finding all the "latest" update rollup packages for it on the internet, since the built-in windows update is no longer supported by Microsoft.
Microsoft's support doesn't mean that much. I'm still using Windows 2000.
Haven't we heard this at least 3-4 times before?
I mean, I've switched to 7 on my newer machines, but my couple of older ones (a minecraft server and a fileserver) are crunching away happily on XP because it's good enough and has low hardware requirements.
I can recall at least several previous instances where MS has publicly said they are going to 'stop supporting XP'...but the patches seem to keep rolling out?
-Styopa
time for me to upgrade a my computer to Windows 7 or 8. I would just buy an upgrade for windows 7, but then I would still have an old 2 GHz Pentium 4 computer. lol Can't do much work with 3D graphics and I can't play the new games. Interesting that some old games from 2007 run fine on Windows XP 32 bit home and a 6 year old video card and Direct x 9. just saying. the new MMORPGs run at 5 frames per second on my current system. haha
guess i can build my own computer for like $500 usd. I don't even need to buy a new monitor, wireless wifi adapter or external hard disk. I can always upgrade my video card later. i might need a new hard drive to install Windows 7 or 8 though.
^^this.
If you're still running 16bit DOS, your machines are highly malware resistant today. I know of no virus or malware circulating currently that will infect your machine.
Then you aren't paying close attention. I still see SQL Slammer attempts several times a day even though it has been something like 10 years since that particular loophole was addressed.
Asus P5W64 Workstation (my Core2duo m/b) has a floppy controller.
ASRock Z77 extreme 6 (core i3/5/7 m/b) has a floppy controller, although it is inconveniently located at the back bottom corner... no IDE on it, though. I've moved my IDEs to an external enclosure with esata/usb.
But yes, it is increasingly difficult to find floppy controllers on modern motherboards. I may eventually need an external (usb) floppy drive or something. The internal usb floppy drives are nigh impossible to find also.
"What are you doing here, Elijah?"
Set Your Watches For the End of Windows
Just like the world abandoned Microsoft when they produced Windows ME, Microsoft BOB, Kin, PlaysForSure, Mira, Clippy...
Microsoft has made a lot of products that people hated. This is just the latest round of failures, but 90% of all business computers are some flavor of Windows. The OS is so entrenched that there is no chance of MS going going away becoming unprofitable.
You know, I agree with your sentiment entirely, which is why I feel bad calling this out:
It's really not. In fact, the firewall is the last thing you should think about.
That's not just because there are so many exploits right now that are for all practical purposes indistinguishable from normal traffic, although that's a good reason, too. It's because the best defenses are always layered defenses, and those start from the inside out.
Far too often I see people begin and end at the firewall. Even if they intended it only be the start, they're thinking rarely progresses much further into the network... why should it? They think about all the stuff the firewall is going to catch, and it seems to take care of so many problems it's hard for them to imagine what else they need to do internally to lock things down. They've succumbed to the "enumerating badness" fallacy, classically described by Marcus Ranum in his must-read Six Dumbest Ideas in Computer Security.
That's exactly backward, though. Where you want to start is at your core data, with the assumption that everything else has already failed, and what can you do to mitigate the disaster of penetration at that last possible level.
Then you work your way out, doing the same thing at each level.
Because almost no one does this, firewalls today are the thin, crunchy shell over the juicy taste explosion of vulnerable systems that crackers crave.
No relation to Happy Monkey
Right, but can you show me the OS that is secure against that threat? Yeah, that's what I thought. The OP has a valid point while it falls under the security through obscurity it's probably more secure than the latest and greatest os.
They're not even in fouth place for the phone market.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
Well, except my proprietary Good Sized Rock system. It's completely impervious to any attack vector short of a chisel or a denser rock.
It can solve any computable problem, as long as the answer happens to be the binary number I etched on it's surface during manufacturing.
Also, make sure you buy a watch that supports setting alarms a year in advance because that's a mostly useless feature that doesn't actually exist in 99.999% of watches ever made. Maybe you can find one of those old Seiko Memory Bank Calendar watches and show off what a hipster you are.
As a simple google search will show you
From the first result: "A lot of Linux software will be expecting to find its resource files in standard locations specified at compile-time, such as /usr/share or /usr/lib, which will fail if the software is not installed in the usual location."
It's not typically done
The very fact that this is not typically done discourages package maintainers from testing this use case, leading to lack of this capability in the application files extracted from the package. Nor is there an easily discoverable tool to create a chroot in which to install a package in one's home directory.
We're still running XP and will be for a while longer.
Ignoring the fact that 7 breaks a lot of stuff my clients use, we've had nothing but problems with Windows 7.
It works fine for standalone users, but as soon as you stick it in a domain and try to use group policies the same way all sorts of weird shit starts creeping in over time.
Several times now we've had to physically goto a load of machines, log in to the local admin accounts and manually delete things in the registry because Win7 corrupted the cached profiles and, unlike WinXP, doesn't fetch them back from the server resulting in the user with the corrupt profile being unable to log in on that machine.
And then there's the weird problem where it randomly kicks itself off the domain and you have to go to the machine, unjoin it from the domain, delete all DNS and AD entries of that machine off the server, and then go back to the machine and re-join it.
Then there's the 64/32-bit crossover problem which means we can't run both unless we segregate them into different OUs and policies because on 32-bit systems GP deployed software goes into "Program Files" and on 64-bit systems it goes into "Program Files (x86)" which breaks certain global icons and scripts (Why didn't they put everything in the same place? Is there some reason to split the 64 and 32 bit Program Files? And even if there is, why not leave "Program Files" for 32-bit stuff and add "Program Files (64-bit)" instead??), and don't get me started on the minefeld of mixing 32 and 64-bit printer drivers!
A counterpart of mine at a college doesn't even bother trying to fix problems with his Win7 machines anymore; As soon as one stops working, they just re-image it and join it to the domain again. This has become a regular part of their monthly maintenance schedule, not a once-in-a-blue-moon event as it currently is with the XP systems.
I am a firm believer in KISS, but Win7 is just a mess. I've never understood why people praise it over Vista as it is not significantly better from where I'm standing aside from stability and bugginess, and most of that has been fixed in later Vista SP's. Is there some kind of Apple-esque subtle brainwashing going on? I still hate the control panel in both, which is just a horrific mess (It's so unintuitive and difficult to find things now that you HAVE to use the search to find control panel functions that it would have taken me 3 clicks to get to in XP and older!)
Microsoft ending support in 2014? Pfft, when HAVE they supported it? It's just as vulnerable to security issues as it was when it first came out and this after 3 service packs and countless hotfixes?
Windows 7 is no better in that regards anyway; I've had to fix just as many hacked and hijacked Win7 machines as I have XP, except with XP - I can repair them! With Win7, the OS *itself* OPPOSES you at every turn when trying to repair embedded malware. You can't even perform repair installs from boot anymore for fucks sake!
This isn't as big a problem for work machines as I can just re-image them and as they are domain-connected the users' work isn't stored on the system, but for laptops (Which we don't maintain images of due to the myriad number of them) it entails at least half a day of rebuilding from scratch!
If a Win7 machine can't boot anymore, we have to rebuild it from scratch and re-install everything. Heck, I found we can't even transfer Win7 from one hard disk to another without risk; Sometimes it works but half the time the system can no longer boot. If you're lucky the Win7 boot repair can fix it, but usually it either can't find the Win7 install or it finds it and then churns away doing stuff then comes back and reports that it couldn't fix it.
I'm not worried about them ceasing support; You should never rely on Microsoft to protect your systems anyway. Lock down the systems without making the system obnoxious to use (So the users won't try and bypass), get and maintain a decent anti-virus and end-point security system, and filter as much as y
please quote me accurately.
Don't worry about that. I had planned on linking to your comment wherever I do so.
In your opinion, should a device manufacturer have monopoly power to provide such a developer SDK for devices that it sells
You can configure a device for other servers
At what recurring cost? I was under the impression that in order to configure a device for any server other than the official public App Store server, Apple charged a business $299 per year for the enterprise developer program plus whatever documentation is needed to obtain and maintain a D-U-N-S number. Thus no matter who would operate the servers, Apple would retain the monopoly power over the developer program.
The $299 is not a per device but per server
And it expires after a year.
and can cover tens of thousands of devices.
Can it cover, say, every iPhone and every iPad owned by a member of a religious organization that has a few million members worldwide?
It is a trivial charge meant mostly to keep away people who aren't serious.
Am I correct in assuming that people who use software developed by people who develop software as a hobby are automatically "people who aren't serious" to you?
Easily fixed if you are not a retard. So, what's the issue? Are you retarded?
As for monopoly power over developers that's a negative. If you are running your own Enterprise SDK you can setup the signing authority however you like. Apple won't even know.
The signing chain has to verify back to Apple, or the device won't accept the signing authority. Apple won't know that the certificates are being verified against, but Apple will know that the certificates were applied for. And I imagine that Apple has policies in place to prevent, say, a cooperative of developers from using the enterprise developer program to open membership in the cooperative to the public and release their own software through an alternate app store operated by the cooperative.
Indeed, the year of the Linux desktop was 2011/2012. Some of us just didn't notice because the GUI was neither Gnome nor KDE, but Android.
And Android still requires applications to run all maximized all the time because applications are allowed to assume that the screen size will never change after installation. So for use cases that require multiple windows, such as viewing a web page on part of the screen and taking notes on the other, or running an application on part of the screen and reading its manual on the other, or writing HTML on part of the screen and previewing the rendered web page on the other, what should Android users do?
(b/c Microsoft in their infinite wisdom didn't or couldn't make a bootable CD image back in the day)
Most likely the reason for no bootcd was because on most systems at that time you needed to install a cdrom driver from a floppy boot disk and then boot to the hard drive just to use your windows 98 install cd. Always had to remember to boot from the hard drive before installing otherwise it would use the boot files from the floppy to start the computer.
use kubuntu?
(UI an operating system does not make)
I'd say developers who aren't registered with Apple or working for an organization registered with Apple aren't serious.
I have completed the process to register my Apple ID as a developer. But when I try to take the next step, to view the iOS App Store Review Guidelines to see whether or not I should buy a recent Mac and sign up for the iOS developer program, I get an "unauthorized" error message. I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on hardware and licenses just to discover that my application concept would be guaranteed to be rejected.
What businesses "need" to do, and what they will, often prove to be two different things.Large businesses, in particular, are (a) highly resistant to being told what to do, when, by a supplier, and (b) have the financial clout to apply the pressure that means they don't have to.
Apart from anything else, don't underestimate how long it takes a business to move from one platform to another - especially if they have proprietary software written for the old platform that they rely on that won't run on the new one. Telling them they "must" make a change may be equivalent to telling them they need to tie up key personnel for weeks or months to do work that, from the company viewpoint, delivers nothing, and during which time those people are also not doing all the new stuff the business employs them to do.
A good example of all of the above would be IBM's plan in the late 60s/early 70s to move mainframe customers off the System 360 architecture onto its then-new, radically different Future Systems design. Future Systems, as such, never made it to market, mostly because IBM's large customers told the company in no uncertain terms that it wasn't for them. Parts of it eventually launched as a somewhat niche product, System/38. By contrast IBM's current flagship mainframe OS is, to this day, System 360 with a huge number of advances and new features - but backward-compatible with everything that's gone before. There are customers out there still running software written decades ago on that platform - because it still works, and they still get value from it.
Or against a guy with a tank and an RPG...
That's why you should switch to KettleBellOS. "The 1-bit operating system that's a 80 pound chunk of metal."
We still use Windows XP Professional and Microsoft Office 2003 where I work. I think some machines have been upgraded to Windows 7 and a newer version of Office, but at least we developers are still on XP.
On vit, on code et puis on meurt.
$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski
* POOR SHOWING TROLLS, & most especially IF that's the "best you've got" - apparently, it is... lol!
Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.
Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?
Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.
If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.
I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.
Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.
Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.
I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.
If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!
You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his banning he begins to send a variety of abusiv
So what? No system is resistant to things like that.
There are unix systems which are resistant to that. They're not invincible to it, but they are resistant where DOS is not.
And can it use LibreOffice Macros or use Python scripts to control itself?
No.
Your problem here seems to be "It isn't Microsoft".
Can MS Office use a proper DB backend?
Access can use Microsoft SQL Server as a database backend, and the version of Stone Edge that the company ended up using supported this. The fact that it was using MSSQL let me transition the company away from Stone Edge, as I could write Python scripts to update the MSSQL database through ODBC behind Stone Edge's back.
Your problem here seems to be "It isn't Microsoft".
The problem is that plenty of businesses are locked into applications that in turn are locked into Microsoft platforms. To get away from "It isn't Microsoft", a business must first identify this lock-in and work around it.
So on (2), how is a developer who offers his application without charge supposed to find the money to pay the recurring fee that Apple charges for remaining "known to Apple" and maintaining "an active OSX account", plus the recurring fee that Authenticode CAs charge for remaining known to Microsoft and maintaining an active Windows desktop account, plus the recurring fee that Microsoft charges for remaining known to Microsoft and maintaining an active Windows Store (for Windows 8 and Windows RT) account? It adds up per platform.
And I've read that joining requires first turning 18. I have a cousin who is learning to program. So how is a developer still in high school supposed to distribute his application to the public? Or is he supposed to show no one until his 18th birthday?
Most likely a developer associated with the Macports project would use his binary packager and sign it for him.
I thought MacPorts was for open-source software. Is relying on someone to sign your software even legal under the "Installation Information" requirement of GPLv3 or LGPLv3?
Public distribution of software is supposed to be under some adult's supervision and an adult who is involved in the Apple developer community.
If one has to be 18 just to sign up, then how should a 15-year-old with a non-programmer parent get "integrated into the developer community" in the first place?
I've got Win95 running on my Libretto 50CT. It's certainly not modern hardware, but I've given it an upgrade to 32 MB RAM, and a 4 GB SSD (just a CF card with IDE adapter). I even found wireless drivers for the Orinoco WaveLAN card I yanked from a first-gen Airport base station, and it'll do 128-bit WEP. You'd be genuinely surprised how usable the web generally is with IE 5.5. No Flash or AJAX, obviously, but I've browsed around abandonware sites and downloaded games directly onto it. FilZip still supports Win95, which is convenient. It runs Office 2000 and Photoshop 3, and honestly, if the battery lasted longer than an hour or two (and Win95 didn't suck so badly accessing NT file servers), I could probably do some non-empty subset of "real work" on it.
Installing Win95 without either a floppy drive or CD-ROM drive really isn't too hard. You can copy the whole installation CD to the hard drive you're installing to (and you'll probably have plenty of space for that), and assuming the hard drive is bootable to some form of DOS, you can launch the installation that way. That's what I had to do for the Libretto, since I don't have a CD-ROM drive that will work with it.
Good luck trying to trick a DOS user into clicking a link or finding holes in DOS's (inexistant) network stack.
There are USB floppy drives. Until about 5 years ago, plenty of HP servers included them, along with the SATA drivers for windows XP.
While it is reasonable that MS would want to stop supporting XP after 10-12 years, it also reasonable that MS should get the bugs out of their operating system to begin with. MS only debugs their software until it is reasonably stable, then lets the users find the rest of the errors. Which is a means of cost management within MS. I would move to Win7(Vista SP?) but it would require removing all applications from my 5 year old machine, installing Win7, then reinstalling my applications. And going through the aggravations of obtaining drivers, etc. The costs would push me to a new machine. But since I like XP (I run Win7 at home) and my computer has sufficient horsepower to run all of my work applications, why make a change. I think lots of individuals and companies feel the same.
Microsoft's big clients (The Fortune 500, the U.S. Military) are the customers that drive Microsoft's decisions.
There's a few of those left running XP, this ensures that they upgrade.
Microsoft support if you are a big fish - is absolutely phenomenal. When I was working for a big fish, they were the most responsive company I have ever worked with. Now I am a little fish, I can hardly get them to answer the phone, and when they do, I get a completely clueless person...
Murphy was an optimist
Govt must tell Microsoft to Open source Windows XP after its EOL
Casteism
Is this really about $99?
And about the fact that it self-destructs after 365 days. If it were a lifetime sub, I'd say "an iPad mini costs $428".
Assume that the iOS developer SDK were included for free within XCode would that solve the problem?
That and port Xcode to iPad. Right now, someone who owns an iPad and a Bluetooth keyboard can't develop an application directly on the iPad, except within things like Codea that Apple was at first reluctant to approve.
It is not the specific policies of the prison that are the issue, which are rather liberal
I have issues with the prison's specific policies as well.
To clarify my previous comment, here are some things I forgot:
Thank you for sticking with this discussion. When I try to discuss details of my disagreement with a dominant gatekeeper's policy, a lot of other Slashdot users have accused me of deliberately posting inflammatory messages.
My comment about Xcode on iPad wasn't necessarily intended to require that Apple expend developer time=money on doing the port itself, just to give other producers of developer tools enough privileges to make developer tools that run as expected.
You expressed unfamiliarity with what the GNU General Public License requires with respect to Installation Information. A "User Product" is any tangible computing device for home use. GPLv3 requires "Installation Information" to accompany the source code of a covered executable delivered "specifically for use in a User Product". This information includes "any methods, procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from a modified version of its Corresponding Source." For applications designed for Mac OS X, "build it in Xcode and disable signature verification" would be enough Installation Information. But for iOS applications, I read "in that User Product" to rule out the excuse "well you can just run it in the iPhone simulator in Xcode".
I think you misunderstand. I was listing the two 'differences' to point out that they're not nearly worth the complaining the online world gives them. I use windows 8, and the only time I see the Metro interface is when I unlock the screen, or hit the windows key and start typing in a program name.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Windows XP has better update time, can update while i am working and less hassles with owner permissions on my folders. Microsoft has been the worst builders of an operating system than Ubuntu. Ubuntu Linux beats any Microsoft Operating system hands down. Microsoft SUX. That Malware bug that was sent and targeting Malwarebytes machines and servers can easily be sent anywhere else. Oh...and by the way guys, This Malware bug, Cannot be stopped by any antivirus, any anti malware or anti spyware software at all. Say good bye to all your hard work MS. Where is anonymous? Oh yeah.....got em.............
We know it's you doing those spam posts http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581857&cid=43276741 and you fail at disproving apk's data on Microsoft Server Class systems maintaining stability & 99.999% uptime and zero unpatched known security issues in their entire suite of products for business development here http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3624213&cid=43390039 - you fail, accept it, troll. All your unjustifiable downmods don't mean a thing since you can't back them up and disprove what was posted there in that 2nd link, and you know it.
Good luck trying to trick a DOS user into clicking a link or finding holes in DOS's (inexistant) network stack.
There are TCP stacks available for DOS, and network enabled applications.
One of them was a multitasking shell for DOS named Windows for workgroups.
There were also Netware IPX networking drivers that could be loaded by config.sys
Furthermore, LANMAN protocol might be used for file sharing purposes on the DOS workstation, in order to access data files stored on shared network servers.
DOS malware/trojan payload might be inserted into the datafiles, being used with the DOS based application
Oh, they say that every year!
Don't they wish...
Sorry but, such things tend not to work when you upgrade Windows and/or Exchange either. Getting ODBC calls to work properly on any 64-bit Windows is a pain in the ass. Especially since the 64-bit ODBC driver is in the 32-bit directory and vise-versa. That was fun to figure out! It took custom scripting, including registry hacks, to modify the vendor install of the application we were using.
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
They developed the Static Driver Verifier [microsoft.com], which uses proof of correctness techniques to insure that drivers won't crash the operating system
I find that hard to belive. Afaict in most PCs, PCI(e) devices have the ability to DMA to anywhere in memory. How is the static driver verifier going to know what the commands sent to the device are going to make the device do to the bus?
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Let's break that off and assume for the purpose of discussion we are OK with the idea that all iOS development happens in OSX.
As long as you're willing to add the cost of a Mac to the list price of the first year of a developer license, resulting in $748 for the first year and $99 for additional years, I'm OK with that.
One thing I'd strongly support is iTunes being able to create provisioning files for an iOS device directly connected. I think that would allow low end amateurs to write their own software on their own iOS devices without undermining the security system.
Agreed 100 percent. If provisioning over USB must be repeated after each power cycle, that's not too different from what the hacking community calls a tethered jailbreak. I guess Apple left out this feature in order to discourage third parties from building app stores around such temporary USB provisioning.
Apple has used the analogy of trucks vs. cars for where they want to go. Some people need to own trucks. Some people can own a car and only sometimes use a truck.
To continue this analogy, some fanboys of iOS and video game consoles are under the impression that truck operation should be strictly licensed, and one would need to first do an apprenticeship for several years at a company that uses trucks and then start your own company in order to become eligible for your company to buy a truck. This analogy happens to fit fairly well in the field of tractor-trailers, whose operation requires a commercial driver's license because motor vehicles are deadly weapons in untrained hands. But there also exist light trucks that aren't any harder to operate than a passenger car, and some of these (SUVs) are designed for easy conversion between car mode and truck mode.
I don't currently own a car or a truck, so I'd appreciate some clarification on this: How easy is it to "only sometimes use a truck"? I was under the impression that renting a pickup truck to carry in a gasoline-powered lawn mower for an annual tune-up and then renting it again to carry it home could exceed the cost of the tune-up. And how easy is it to "only sometimes use a computer", especially if you'd need to install an application?
The Warranty Act reduces "void if product is used with an unlicensed part" clauses in consumer product warranties to "void if product is damaged by an unlicensed part". The DMCA, on the other hand, is interpreted such that the adapters needed to connect an unlicensed part to a device circumvent a technical protection measure on the device's copyrighted firmware.
I used to work for a medical equipment manufacturer. We actually made servers, desktops, and laptops designed to connect to and control medical imaging equipment. As you may know, it takes YEARS to certify medical equipment and the things that connect to them. We actually had an inside joke that if HP quit making our printer, we'd have to insert its replacement into patients for 7 years of testing. Not far off. We HAVE to be able to prove to the FDA that a change in our Hardware, Software, or Peripherals do not adversely affect the function of the medical device and that the OUTPUT FROM the Hardware, Software, and Peripherals are EXACTLY the same. It takes 2 years to get an incremental IMPROVEMENT to the SOFTWARE approved. A change in OS--They MIGHT be finally finishing up the move to WIndows 7 now.(We had special permission from M$ and the EU to buy XP-Pro from a M$ division in Switzerland) And since we ship to Europe--GOTTA DO IT TWICE! (Asia & South America are pretty trusting--Africa's just happy to get medical equipment).
I'm SURE Medical Software companies could find SOME commercial linux company like RedHat to lock down an OS for them.
Like Vista to Windows 7, Windows 8 to Windows 9
Or against a guy with a tank and an RPG...
Both are very expensive and easily noticed by the public.
The defense method against those is the police and local guard units; regardless of whether the computer is running Windows '95 or a modern network connected OS.
I have a dos 6.33 + machine hooked to the internet, doesn't show a single graphic on a web page, but it is on the net :)