User: Ripit

Re:Let me get this straight

On: Last Year's CanSecWest Winner Repeats on Vista, Ubuntu Wins

If you can exploit a laptop in this contest you get to keep it? Why would you want a laptop that you know is insecure?

You forgot the part where you link to a laptop that's secure. I'll be waiting right here.

Re:Please stay on topic

On: Israelis Sue Government For Laser Cannons

"Full civil rights?"

You are a fucking idiot.

No

On: Cat Ownership Correlated With Heart Health

you can not has cheezburger.

Re:Intel

On: Intel Ramps Up 45nm Chip Production, Announces 'Atom' Line

Would this article read the same (AMD playing catch-up) if Intel didn't sponsor /. so much?
Benchmark much?

desktop CPUs 2007
mobile CPUs 2008
mobile CPUs 2007

AMD has been lagging in performance, power consumption, and cost for many months now.

Guess who!

On: Feds Have a High-Speed Backdoor Into Wireless Carrier

FTA:

That suit names Verizon Wireless as the culprit.
"Can you hear me now?"

"Yes we can, perfectly clear."

Some insight into Vista release prep

On: Microsoft Internal Emails Show Dismay With Vista

FTFA, Steven Sinofsky's first bulleted point in an email to Steve Ballmer:

No one really believed we would ever ship so they didn't start the work until very late in 2006. This led to the lack of availability. For example my home multi-function printer did not have drivers until 2/2 and even pulled their 1/30 drivers and re-released them (Brother).
I'm not sure if "they" meant MS employees writing drivers, or hardware vendors writing drivers. Either way, it seems MS has a credibility problem.

Also, the unsaid meaning of some of the emails is: recognizing that they failed to set a high enough priority to having the device drivers ready when Vista shipped.

It's not surprising that MS corporate brass had these discussions. You'd expect them to. What is surprising is that they failed at something so fundamental to the business of selling OSes.