I have a frriend who worked at MS. During the orientation they spit out a bunch of stats about the network. One of those was that there are 2,000 + serious hacking attacks on MS's networks everyday. (The speaker did not define what "serious" was.)
My impression has been that MS Research is focused on VERY long term projects that we won't see for a while. In particular a good example speech recognition. I know for a fact that MS has one of the BEST speech recognition groups ou there and that they have just decided so far that it wasn't good enough to put in any product.
I would imagine as time passes and the stuff from the group gets finished we'll see more cool things like this mouse.
Two things: 1) Standard Oil was in todays market terms bigger than MS. 2) Rockefeller actually ended up RICHER and I mean way RICHER after the break up. Bill is more likely to be quivering in anticipation of the killing he'll make.
It is a press release. It doesn't say they beat the Oracle challenge. Only that they say they are unvieling a innovative (hehe) solution to the Business problem posed by Oracle in it's challenge. Dated from March of this year.
Press release is here: http://www.microsoft.com/PressPass/press/1999/Mar9 9/SQLEntpr.htm
Allen and Gates are very much still friends as far as I know. Allen recently remodelled the Cinerama theatre in downtown Seattle. Gates attended the opening. Bill has also been seen at Portland Trailblazers games in Seattle. (Allen owns the Trailblazers). There are other less formal things that we don't hear about of course
Microsoft described this idea several weeks ago at one of their developer conferences. I cannot remember which one but it's been out and about for 3 or 4 weeks now.
Windows 95 Gold installed IE2. Thus IE has been distributed with Windows in someway. This is one of the most foolish accusations made by the DOJ. I hope that Jackson will not consider this allegation since it is not true. He should consider all the other ones (which are true) and rule according to those. If he does rule on the browser one there is essentially going to be an automatic appeal. Not that there isn't already. This just makes it even easier.
I don't believe MS is even done with the planning for the attack on Linux yet. Right now they are operating under a ad-hoc plan designed to mesh with the current situation, their attacks on Linux are tailored as such and fit with the DOG trial. To them the threat right now is what is what I've heard called the "big three": Sun, Oracle and IBM. They don't care about Linux yet, it's not big enough and it's not impacting their revenue stream. (yet of course.)
When Linux grows to the point of being a threat to MS which I have no doubt it will do then they will respond with their real PR, spin and flashy features campaign as per the situation at that time.
What? MS has sold stuff to Rational not the other way around. Until a little while ago MS owned Visual Test (until 4.0a I believe) now they have sold it to Rational and Rational owns it. I love VT, it's a great product and concept, doesn't matter who makes it IMO. If anything I would expect MS to sell more stuff they don't really need to Rational to get it out of the company and drop overhead. This is kind of like the dumping of SoftImage a while ago. It's not the core business so they have no reason to have it. Visio on the other hand IS core business. It jives well with Office and heck it already works with it pretty well anyways. I'll be pleased to see this, as much as stability is an issue the Office apps still work together REALLY well. I look forward to Visio working even better with it. - Chokai
I don't have any sumpathy for this guy. The defense department as much as we may dislike it does many things of great importance to us. I hope he gets a harsher sentence than most others would. Interfering with national defense is not a laughing matter.
Consideration about the U of Washington: They have LOTS of CS money but you know where it comes from.:-) The department is not however totally under MS's hand and still is quite independent or so it appears from the very limited time I've spent there. (My friend is a CS major I am not.) They also recieve money from other firms like Boeing and such. Also good Physics school, ok Business school to if for some reason you want to be prepared to manage people in the event that happens.
Is adapting draft standards that never make it or adopting "standards" which they draft with other companies such as Intel and then continuing to force them down our throats after they've died. (VBScript anyone?) I'm sorry but standards drafted by MS with other companies like Intel, Dell or Compaq aren't standards, they are just MS pressuring those companies into putting their name on it so they can say "look it's a standard."
On the other hand if Netscape would support those proposed standards (in particular I am interested in the SMIL and HTML + TIME standards proposed by MS and Macromedia things would be better over all. Of course the ones listed in the letter are the biggest.
BTW doesn't IE5 support XML fully? I haven't read but I did see it listed as spec. Also when I look at Office 2K output they seem riddled with XML? Can someone confirm if this is an in house version, the standard or a Microsoft "improved" (hah!) version...
I played with a beta of Windows 2000 server earlier this year. The BASE install on my PII 400 ate 86 mb of RAM just to run. Then when I started gutting all the stuff I DIDN'T NEED i got it down to a "measely" 68 mb. Pretty pathetic.
I have to be honest and say I am unimpressed by both. For example the Windows box is still pingable and the Linux box is not and thus not vulnerable to ping flooding/smurf attacks. As a example (result?) of the configuration differences the bulk of the attacks on the Windows box also simply appear to be DOS attacks, not anything really effective at testing the security. I find myself wondering what the percentage of attacks on the Linux box are DOS boxes as opposed to the percentage on the MS box. When Microsoft can come out and say "all the attacks on the box were DOS attacks (which of course all OSes are vulnerable to in some way or another) they are going to have a MAJOR PR coup. I hope those crackers who are simply running DOS attacks on the Windows box stop, or else the Linux community is going to end up with egg on it's face big time, when MS can say: "But they never once managed to compromise the security and access information they were not supposed to be able to."
Ahh but you should see all those Californian's that came here in the 80's try to drive in the rain.:-) That's equally entertaining. Watch out for that BMW or that SUV which the owner doesn't know how to drive!!!!
Ahh but see that's why it has something like 25 servers.:-) In order to deliver continous service they have to have that many to cycle through so they have enough up at any time to garuntee access. I must admit I can always get to ms.com when I need to.
I just noticed that Microsoft keeps adding new features to the status log and so forth. I wonder if one or two of the reasons this site occasionally goes off line is to implement these changes? (I seriously doubt this site has a content staging server for testing...)
Good question. why don't you ask them that? I wouldn't know. My best guess would be that microsoft.com is consisdered mission critical and is redundant in many different ways. I doubt that this server is even on a UPS. i wonder if it is a box plugged in under someones desk or in a test lab. (microsoft.com was two boxes under a developers desk for a long time.)
Hmmm.. If all you think was changed between NT 4.0 and 3.51 was the gui and the utilities you really don't know ANYTHING about NT 4.0's development. Aded amongst other things:
1)Of course the interface. (duh) 2)Big time OLE "enhancements" 3)Nearly a complete rewrite of the kernel. Biggest part was the Win32 subsystem was moved into the kernal to increase performance. In WinNT 3.51 it ran seperatly, this is one of the reason why many people percieve 4.0 as less stable than 3.51. 4) Much much bigger and better hardware support. 5) Many new APIs
Whether this was good of course is open to discussion. But can I make a suggestion: you need to crawl back into the hole you came from before you embarrass the linux community with your stupidity. If you don't know anything about something don't talk about it like you do for godsakes!
The thunderstorms in Seattle were VERY powerful. The school district I work with has schools scattered throughout the Redmond/Kirkland/Bellevue area and numerous problems arose. We also had highly unusual urban power failures, something that hasn't happened since a few years ago when we had 18" of snow. (Douglas Fir's don't like snow if you get my point.) This storm was highly unusual our area. Even with UPSs many many networks and ISPs in Seattle had trouble. Although I doubt that is the sole reason for the crash I would not ignore what MS has said regarding the weather.
This also happened to the University of Washington team. At one point we lost over half our blocks, then we were completely off the list, then we were 10 placed down from where we were, now we are back where we are supposed to be. All very odd. It seems to be pretty common I guess.
This cool stat isn't what you think. This is hype! The sales stats cited are only for the first week of July. Which is VERY important. That means that in the first week after the software became available in Japan it dominated. MacOS, Windows et al have all been selling for months there. What you are seeing is the intial interest spike as people rush to the stores to get it. (Remember people lining up when Windows 95 came out? ) Check back in 4 or 5 weeks and see how it compares then!
Re:Okay, then why does MS still use Apache?
on
Microsoft Janus
·
· Score: 1
I believe homepages.msn.com is contracted out to someone else and is not hosted by MS. They only branded it. I'm not completely sure though. If this was the case of course the company could choose whatever they wanted to use as long as it got the job done.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a frriend who worked at MS. During the orientation they spit out a bunch of stats about the network. One of those was that there are 2,000 + serious hacking attacks on MS's networks everyday. (The speaker did not define what "serious" was.)
My impression has been that MS Research is focused on VERY long term projects that we won't see for a while. In particular a good example speech recognition. I know for a fact that MS has one of the BEST speech recognition groups ou there and that they have just decided so far that it wasn't good enough to put in any product.
I would imagine as time passes and the stuff from the group gets finished we'll see more cool things like this mouse.
Two things: 1) Standard Oil was in todays market terms bigger than MS. 2) Rockefeller actually ended up RICHER and I mean way RICHER after the break up. Bill is more likely to be quivering in anticipation of the killing he'll make.
It is a press release. It doesn't say they beat the Oracle challenge. Only that they say they are unvieling a innovative (hehe) solution to the Business problem posed by Oracle in it's challenge. Dated from March of this year.
9 9/SQLEntpr.htm
Press release is here: http://www.microsoft.com/PressPass/press/1999/Mar
Allen and Gates are very much still friends as far as I know. Allen recently remodelled the Cinerama theatre in downtown Seattle. Gates attended the opening. Bill has also been seen at Portland Trailblazers games in Seattle. (Allen owns the Trailblazers). There are other less formal things that we don't hear about of course
Microsoft described this idea several weeks ago at one of their developer conferences. I cannot remember which one but it's been out and about for 3 or 4 weeks now.
Windows 95 Gold installed IE2. Thus IE has been distributed with Windows in someway. This is one of the most foolish accusations made by the DOJ. I hope that Jackson will not consider this allegation since it is not true. He should consider all the other ones (which are true) and rule according to those. If he does rule on the browser one there is essentially going to be an automatic appeal. Not that there isn't already. This just makes it even easier.
I don't believe MS is even done with the planning for the attack on Linux yet. Right now they are operating under a ad-hoc plan designed to mesh with the current situation, their attacks on Linux are tailored as such and fit with the DOG trial. To them the threat right now is what is what I've heard called the "big three": Sun, Oracle and IBM. They don't care about Linux yet, it's not big enough and it's not impacting their revenue stream. (yet of course.)
When Linux grows to the point of being a threat to MS which I have no doubt it will do then they will respond with their real PR, spin and flashy features campaign as per the situation at that time.
What? MS has sold stuff to Rational not the other way around. Until a little while ago MS owned Visual Test (until 4.0a I believe) now they have sold it to Rational and Rational owns it. I love VT, it's a great product and concept, doesn't matter who makes it IMO. If anything I would expect MS to sell more stuff they don't really need to Rational to get it out of the company and drop overhead. This is kind of like the dumping of SoftImage a while ago. It's not the core business so they have no reason to have it. Visio on the other hand IS core business. It jives well with Office and heck it already works with it pretty well anyways. I'll be pleased to see this, as much as stability is an issue the Office apps still work together REALLY well. I look forward to Visio working even better with it. - Chokai
I don't have any sumpathy for this guy. The defense department as much as we may dislike it does many things of great importance to us. I hope he gets a harsher sentence than most others would. Interfering with national defense is not a laughing matter.
Consideration about the U of Washington: They have LOTS of CS money but you know where it comes from. :-) The department is not however totally under MS's hand and still is quite independent or so it appears from the very limited time I've spent there. (My friend is a CS major I am not.) They also recieve money from other firms like Boeing and such. Also good Physics school, ok Business school to if for some reason you want to be prepared to manage people in the event that happens.
Is adapting draft standards that never make it or adopting "standards" which they draft with other companies such as Intel and then continuing to force them down our throats after they've died. (VBScript anyone?) I'm sorry but standards drafted by MS with other companies like Intel, Dell or Compaq aren't standards, they are just MS pressuring those companies into putting their name on it so they can say "look it's a standard."
On the other hand if Netscape would support those proposed standards (in particular I am interested in the SMIL and HTML + TIME standards proposed by MS and Macromedia things would be better over all. Of course the ones listed in the letter are the biggest.
BTW doesn't IE5 support XML fully? I haven't read but I did see it listed as spec. Also when I look at Office 2K output they seem riddled with XML? Can someone confirm if this is an in house version, the standard or a Microsoft "improved" (hah!) version...
Good. ;-) I haven't been able to ping it all morning.
I played with a beta of Windows 2000 server earlier this year. The BASE install on my PII 400 ate 86 mb of RAM just to run. Then when I started gutting all the stuff I DIDN'T NEED i got it down to a "measely" 68 mb. Pretty pathetic.
I have to be honest and say I am unimpressed by both. For example the Windows box is still pingable and the Linux box is not and thus not vulnerable to ping flooding/smurf attacks. As a example (result?) of the configuration differences the bulk of the attacks on the Windows box also simply appear to be DOS attacks, not anything really effective at testing the security. I find myself wondering what the percentage of attacks on the Linux box are DOS boxes as opposed to the percentage on the MS box. When Microsoft can come out and say "all the attacks on the box were DOS attacks (which of course all OSes are vulnerable to in some way or another) they are going to have a MAJOR PR coup. I hope those crackers who are simply running DOS attacks on the Windows box stop, or else the Linux community is going to end up with egg on it's face big time, when MS can say: "But they never once managed to compromise the security and access information they were not supposed to be able to."
Ahh but you should see all those Californian's that came here in the 80's try to drive in the rain. :-) That's equally entertaining. Watch out for that BMW or that SUV which the owner doesn't know how to drive!!!!
Ahh but see that's why it has something like 25 servers. :-) In order to deliver continous service they have to have that many to cycle through so they have enough up at any time to garuntee access. I must admit I can always get to ms.com when I need to.
I just noticed that Microsoft keeps adding new features to the status log and so forth. I wonder if one or two of the reasons this site occasionally goes off line is to implement these changes? (I seriously doubt this site has a content staging server for testing...)
Good question. why don't you ask them that? I wouldn't know. My best guess would be that microsoft.com is consisdered mission critical and is redundant in many different ways. I doubt that this server is even on a UPS. i wonder if it is a box plugged in under someones desk or in a test lab. (microsoft.com was two boxes under a developers desk for a long time.)
Hmmm.. If all you think was changed between NT 4.0 and 3.51 was the gui and the utilities you really don't know ANYTHING about NT 4.0's development. Aded amongst other things:
1)Of course the interface. (duh)
2)Big time OLE "enhancements"
3)Nearly a complete rewrite of the kernel. Biggest part was the Win32 subsystem was moved into the kernal to increase performance. In WinNT 3.51 it ran seperatly, this is one of the reason why many people percieve 4.0 as less stable than 3.51.
4) Much much bigger and better hardware support.
5) Many new APIs
Whether this was good of course is open to discussion. But can I make a suggestion: you need to crawl back into the hole you came from before you embarrass the linux community with your stupidity. If you don't know anything about something don't talk about it like you do for godsakes!
The thunderstorms in Seattle were VERY powerful. The school district I work with
has schools scattered throughout the Redmond/Kirkland/Bellevue area and numerous problems arose. We also had highly unusual urban power failures, something that hasn't happened since a few years ago when we had 18" of snow. (Douglas Fir's don't like snow if you get my point.) This storm was highly unusual our area. Even with UPSs many many networks and ISPs in Seattle had trouble. Although I doubt that is the sole reason for the crash I would not ignore what MS has said regarding the weather.
According to my office mate many years ago Bill said the same thing in an interview.
This also happened to the University of Washington team. At one point we lost over half our blocks, then we were completely off the list, then we were 10 placed down from where we were, now we are back where we are supposed to be. All very odd. It seems to be pretty common I guess.
This cool stat isn't what you think. This is hype! The sales stats cited are only for the first week of July. Which is VERY important. That means that in the first week after the software became available in Japan it dominated. MacOS, Windows et al have all been selling for months there. What you are seeing is the intial interest spike as people rush to the stores to get it. (Remember people lining up when Windows 95 came out? ) Check back in 4 or 5 weeks and see how it compares then!
I believe homepages.msn.com is contracted out to someone else and is not hosted by MS. They only branded it. I'm not completely sure though. If this was the case of course the company could choose whatever they wanted to use as long as it got the job done.