(This is not intended to be a knock on Linux). Linux netbooks, after enjoying a brief marketshare spike when there was no alternative, are not popular with the majority of end-users. So what makes Google think that Android will do any better than Linux did? There's way more software for Linux than Android--and way more for Windows than Linux...
Even if you add a way to connect to the Internet, why would Android be any better for Netbooks than Linux was? At least with Linux, and especially with Windows, I'm not stuck with a useless dumb terminal when I'm not able to connect to the Internet.
Sorry, but if Linux isn't doing too hot on Netbooks, I really don't see how Android wouldn't be worse... Android is a cell phone OS and that's it...
What I found out then and is even more true in the US today, is that as long as your reason for firing someone is not directly based on their age, race, officially recognized religion, country of national origin, or recognized handicap, that you can pretty much fire them for any other reason (or non-reason), work-related or not.
What rock have you been under? In the US, you can hire or fire anyone for any reason you choose, as long as your reasoning has nothing to do with a "protected class" (i.e. race, gender, ethnic group, religion, etc). You can discriminate all you like--unless there's a law against it. If someone with brown pants gave you the finger on your way to work, you can go and fire the first employee you find with brown pants--although that employee would probably win an unemployment claim and have the last laugh... If it's not protected (right or wrong, sexual orientation is not protected in most states), it's a valid reason.
Or maybe their contract works out better if they go out of business, then McD gets the software, with full source code, and unlimited rights, automatically.
This should present an interesting problem as multiple customers probably have this clause. Talk about some serious forking! Now, what happens if a patent troll picks up the code in liquidation--who actually owns/gets to use the code?
In all fairness, there are enough home users who find this feature cool, but stupid that it's only available (to us) in Win7 Ultimate. Why not make it also available to Home-Premium users (not Home-Basic or Starter edition), but include XP Home instead?
Also, does this mean that XP will be crippled where it can't connect to the Internet? If not, then Microsoft's going to have to keep providing security fixes for the XP virtual machine until Win7 is retired!!!
Actually, you are mistaken. History lesson for the day... Microsoft included "Real Mode" in Windows 3.0 to support Windows 1.0 & 2.x apps, as they used a different memory addressing scheme--conventional (640K) + expanded memory. Microsoft removed Real Mode for Windows 3.1. At the time, if you needed to run a Windows 2.x app, you could keep a copy of Windows 3.0 in a different directory than 3.1, close out of 3.1, then run 3.0 Real Mode. Switching between modes (Real, 286 Standard, and 386 Enhanced) required exiting Windows & going back in using a different mode...
So, the last time Microsoft broke Windows app compatibility was 1992...
Windows 7 32-bit will run 16 & 32-bit applications, so backward compatibility goes back to Windows 3.0 apps (1990). Windows 7 64-bit will run 32 & 64-bit applications, so native backward compatibility goes to Windows 95 applications (and probably some Win32S apps that could run under Windows 3.1x). Actually, including XP in a v/m effectively allows Windows 7 to run even 16-bit DOS & Windows 3.x applications--as long as they could run under XP...
The NEC V20 was an 8088 replacement, but it really was an 80186 processor with an 8088 pin-out. The V30 was the 8086 version. Having come to market some 8 years after the 8088/8086, they incorporated design improvements and new instructions, but were generally about 30% faster. They were great for spreadsheets but sucked with games--games of that era utilized published timings for instructions. "Turbo" XTs didn't affect them too much since every instruction that took x amount of time on a 4.77MHz 8088 took x/2 time on a 9.54MHz 8088. On a V20/V30, games would seem to speed up or slow down based on what instruction was run...
I second this... It's a great little device and the stylus makes "typing" on the virtual keyboard a breeze. To add, it has a great screen (really dense pixels, so text is readable at teeny font sizes) and can be used horizontally or vertically.
I'm no lawyer but wasn't the Bilski decision supposed to put an end to these software patent lawsuits & (essentially) invalidate software patents? Software patents don't deal with "machines" or "transformations", so I'm confused as to how these continue... Or is the Bilski case waiting to have their day in front of the US Supreme Court and such cases will continue until a ruling comes down from SCOTUS...
Your manager is jeopardising the company since any unfairly poor reference would leave the company open to legal action.
Judging by your use of Imperial spelling, you don't live in the U.S. (This is not an insult, just an analysis). The way it works in the U.S. is not that any unfairly poor reference but any reference--even if poor and deserved exposes a company to libel. That's why the majority of posters above are saying that most U.S. based employers will just verify start & end dates. In fact, some will not even verify salary and others will only provide that info if the employee permits them. But the vast majority will not go into details (job title, performance reviews, etc.), even if the employee names someone as a reference. In the U.S., the actions of employees are the actions of a company, so that's why many companies have policies that effectively say "all employee info is to be sent out by HR only..."
90% of the development cost of IE would have needed to be done anyway to support HTML-viewer applications in the OS, such as the help system
Not really. First off, HTML Help's CHM format is only marginally better than Windows 3.1x/95's HLP format (which already included hyperlinking, tree views, image support, etc). Second, they could have licensed--or grabbed from open-source--an HTML rendering engine for a fraction of what they spent on making IE. You're right in that once they had a browser then the costs of building features in OS's was marginal, but I'm saying that the cost of building the browser from scratch was a total waste.
I think IE has more than proven its worth to MS over the years. Or do you seriously believe all the traffic IE drives towards MSN is utterly worthless?
What gives you the idea that IE (vs. any other bundled browser) drives traffic towards MSN? There's only 3 places historically that Windows users had "unsolicited" links to MSN--on the Windows desktop (going back to Win95), as a Favorite in IE, and as the default homepage (that most people change). The first never had anything to do with IE--in fact, Win95 retail didn't even include IE!--you had to buy the Plus! pack or pirate the OEM-only Win95B or C. The last 2 would have been just as effective with any other browser bundled with Windows--include a bookmark in Netscape & set the default homepage to MSN.
Let's see... Internet Explorer has cost Microsoft billions when you go all the way back to 1995. Between antitrust lawsuits, bribes to AOL (a decade ago), legal fees, support costs, a seemingly endless number of security holes, the ActiveX debacle, the "MSVM" settlement, unhappy OEMs who couldn't bundle competing browsers, unhappy customers who have had to deal with malware, continuing to support 4 versions of IE, etc., etc., etc.--I just don't understand why Microsoft didn't pull the plug on IE 5 years ago...
The worst part about it is that.NET is the only browser-specific technology Microsoft seems to truly employ... If Microsoft would have just partnered with another browser (Firefox, Chrome, Safari, even Netscape, etc.), their bottom line would be much better. IE never drove sales of any other Microsoft product--how many people do you know have said "well, I need to buy a PC with Windows over a Mac because I want IE!" IE just came along for the ride with other Microsoft apps (Windows, Office, Visual Studio, games, etc.) for the sole purpose of killing Netscape... In retrospect, what was the point?
What if I'm an anti-Chinese blogger that catches the ire of someone in the Chinese government... Worse, what if my words cause economic harm to China--bad for them but great for my blog... They put out an arrest warrant for me for "defaming"... Now, while I wouldn't fear extradition from the US over my freedom of speech, does this mean that I'm in danger of being extradited to China should I travel to a country that has a liberal extradition treaty with China? Sure sounds like it...
I agree with another poster--it's time for some basic "global laws." It's too bad the UN is too gridlocked and useless to prevent situations like these from happening...
I'm not too happy with this ambitious release schedule unless they dump Vista. Simply put, Microsoft will have to continue to support multiple operating systems for YEARS. By the time Win7 is released, Microsoft will be supporting Windows 2000, XP, Vista, and 7--both 32 and 64-bit versions. That's 8 operating systems. (W2K will continue to receive security fixes through June, 2010 and yes, there was a very rare 64-bit OEM version of W2K).
We all know the general consensus is that most present XP users will stick with XP and a LOT of Vista folks won't want to shell out $$$ for "Vista SP3." So, here's what I propose... First, Microsoft could save-face by offering all users of Vista, including OEM ones, free upgrades to Win7. That might even be enough to kill off some of the Vista lawsuits. An existing Vista license key can be used to install the equivalent edition of Win7. Second, there would be no such thing as Win7 "Home Basic", just Win7 "Home". Microsoft could make a new low-end Win7 "Netbook Edition", which has already been implied. To help entice people to switch, Vista Home Basic license keys install Win7 "Home" (Premium)--so those users get a step up. With that program, Microsoft puts the nails in Vista's coffin--they announce they would cease making bugfixes for Vista when Win7-SP1 is released and security fixes for Vista cease 6 months later.
This has a few benefits. First, very few companies would scream since Vista deployment is rare. Second, Microsoft can now say "yes, Windows 7 is a smaller release". Finally, while it's a financial hit up front from all the Vista upgrades, Microsoft can focus on fixing bugs in Win7 only and providing security hotfixes for XP and Win7.
Go back to 1996. As part of some sort of agreement, Microsoft included AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, and/or WOW on the Win95B, Win98, and WinMe installation CDs. This was because somebody was complaining about Microsoft using their OS to sell MSN.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. NO converter boxes with component video are coupon-eligible. The only valid outputs are RF coax (ch3/4), composite (RCA yellow jack), and S-Video. A "coupon-eligible converter box" ("CECB") is limited by law to no more than 480i resolution.
True, but since the article specifically talks about banks, how many banks do you know of load 3rd party advertisements, especially on their online banking site? Sure, the bank might have some banner ads, usually for their own services like overdraft protection or mortgages, but no real bank would allow someone else to control even part of what appears to the end-user on their online banking site... You can bet that whatever banner ads appear are all hosted internally.
From TFA: "Klein says placing a low-profile piece of malicious JavaScript on a high-profile Website isn't difficult to do, and the malware is basically invisible to the user."
I don't see how any well-designed high-profile site wouldn't account for the possibility it might get hacked, let alone not have an automated method for undoing the damage... A simple approach would be to generate an MD5 checksum from each file (i.e. ASP, JPG, flash) and compare it to the MD5 checksums of what they're "supposed" to be. Generate & compare every 15 or 30 seconds. If there's a discrepancy, copy the file back from a read-only source and send an administrative alert. Hell, it's a simple VBScript...
Wrong. It was Win95. I remember because I had to get permission from my parents to come home past my curfew. By the Win98 era, I was living on my own in another city...
This is nothing new... Microsoft did the exact same thing in '94-'95 with Windows 95, only back then we got our leaked betas by way of pirate BBSs and 28.8 modems. This unofficial beta test put pre-release Win95 in the hands of thousands of computer geeks, who ended up lining up outside CompUSAs, Computer Citys, and Best Buys to get their copies of Win95 at 12:00am on 8/24/95... Win95's positive buzz was a direct result of the leaked betas.
Now, Windows 7 needs to deliver just like Win95 did in terms of app compatibility, drivers, and improvements...
Oh, and for the guy above who said that Vista's driver issue has improved--it really hasn't. People just replaced their older hardware, so the improvement is mostly perception.
Linux has made inroads in cheap ultra-portables. Windows has no-where to go. It's too slow for ultra-portables, it's too low quality for a luxury product.
Since when is a $300-400 netbook PC a "luxury product"? When Toshiba Librettos were the only such product on the market in '96-'99, they were $2000--in "10+ years ago money". Now that's a "luxury product". Plus, a netbook with 512MB RAM and a 1.6GHz Atom processor (which, BTW, has hyper-threading) is easily 15x the minimum requirements for XP Home, and can run that 7-year-old OS quite admirably... So no, it's not "too slow for ultra-portables."
1GB is around four times the original requirements for running Windows XP
Nope. 1GB is 16x the minimum required for XP Home and XP Pro, which require a minimum of 64MB. Even if you follow Microsoft's recommended minimum of 128MB, 1GB is still 8x the minimum.
The way I see it, if you have a fault in your memory, wouldn't the constant swapping in/out of a page file be MORE dangerous since now it affects everything that goes into that physical address? I'd assume that without a page file, memory stays much more constant than it would with a page file--after all, there's nothing to be gained by swapping data between addresses in physical memory... (In fact, it would just waste CPU cycles). So, if you have a fault, wouldn't you want to turn off the page file so that fault has the opportunity to do the least amount of damage to data?
Slashdot Mirror
(This is not intended to be a knock on Linux). Linux netbooks, after enjoying a brief marketshare spike when there was no alternative, are not popular with the majority of end-users. So what makes Google think that Android will do any better than Linux did? There's way more software for Linux than Android--and way more for Windows than Linux...
Even if you add a way to connect to the Internet, why would Android be any better for Netbooks than Linux was? At least with Linux, and especially with Windows, I'm not stuck with a useless dumb terminal when I'm not able to connect to the Internet.
Sorry, but if Linux isn't doing too hot on Netbooks, I really don't see how Android wouldn't be worse... Android is a cell phone OS and that's it...
What rock have you been under? In the US, you can hire or fire anyone for any reason you choose, as long as your reasoning has nothing to do with a "protected class" (i.e. race, gender, ethnic group, religion, etc). You can discriminate all you like--unless there's a law against it. If someone with brown pants gave you the finger on your way to work, you can go and fire the first employee you find with brown pants--although that employee would probably win an unemployment claim and have the last laugh... If it's not protected (right or wrong, sexual orientation is not protected in most states), it's a valid reason.
This should present an interesting problem as multiple customers probably have this clause. Talk about some serious forking! Now, what happens if a patent troll picks up the code in liquidation--who actually owns/gets to use the code?
In all fairness, there are enough home users who find this feature cool, but stupid that it's only available (to us) in Win7 Ultimate. Why not make it also available to Home-Premium users (not Home-Basic or Starter edition), but include XP Home instead?
Also, does this mean that XP will be crippled where it can't connect to the Internet? If not, then Microsoft's going to have to keep providing security fixes for the XP virtual machine until Win7 is retired!!!
Actually, you are mistaken. History lesson for the day... Microsoft included "Real Mode" in Windows 3.0 to support Windows 1.0 & 2.x apps, as they used a different memory addressing scheme--conventional (640K) + expanded memory. Microsoft removed Real Mode for Windows 3.1. At the time, if you needed to run a Windows 2.x app, you could keep a copy of Windows 3.0 in a different directory than 3.1, close out of 3.1, then run 3.0 Real Mode. Switching between modes (Real, 286 Standard, and 386 Enhanced) required exiting Windows & going back in using a different mode...
So, the last time Microsoft broke Windows app compatibility was 1992...
Windows 7 32-bit will run 16 & 32-bit applications, so backward compatibility goes back to Windows 3.0 apps (1990). Windows 7 64-bit will run 32 & 64-bit applications, so native backward compatibility goes to Windows 95 applications (and probably some Win32S apps that could run under Windows 3.1x). Actually, including XP in a v/m effectively allows Windows 7 to run even 16-bit DOS & Windows 3.x applications--as long as they could run under XP...
The NEC V20 was an 8088 replacement, but it really was an 80186 processor with an 8088 pin-out. The V30 was the 8086 version. Having come to market some 8 years after the 8088/8086, they incorporated design improvements and new instructions, but were generally about 30% faster. They were great for spreadsheets but sucked with games--games of that era utilized published timings for instructions. "Turbo" XTs didn't affect them too much since every instruction that took x amount of time on a 4.77MHz 8088 took x/2 time on a 9.54MHz 8088. On a V20/V30, games would seem to speed up or slow down based on what instruction was run...
I second this... It's a great little device and the stylus makes "typing" on the virtual keyboard a breeze. To add, it has a great screen (really dense pixels, so text is readable at teeny font sizes) and can be used horizontally or vertically.
I'm no lawyer but wasn't the Bilski decision supposed to put an end to these software patent lawsuits & (essentially) invalidate software patents? Software patents don't deal with "machines" or "transformations", so I'm confused as to how these continue... Or is the Bilski case waiting to have their day in front of the US Supreme Court and such cases will continue until a ruling comes down from SCOTUS...
Judging by your use of Imperial spelling, you don't live in the U.S. (This is not an insult, just an analysis). The way it works in the U.S. is not that any unfairly poor reference but any reference--even if poor and deserved exposes a company to libel. That's why the majority of posters above are saying that most U.S. based employers will just verify start & end dates. In fact, some will not even verify salary and others will only provide that info if the employee permits them. But the vast majority will not go into details (job title, performance reviews, etc.), even if the employee names someone as a reference. In the U.S., the actions of employees are the actions of a company, so that's why many companies have policies that effectively say "all employee info is to be sent out by HR only..."
Not really. First off, HTML Help's CHM format is only marginally better than Windows 3.1x/95's HLP format (which already included hyperlinking, tree views, image support, etc). Second, they could have licensed--or grabbed from open-source--an HTML rendering engine for a fraction of what they spent on making IE. You're right in that once they had a browser then the costs of building features in OS's was marginal, but I'm saying that the cost of building the browser from scratch was a total waste.
What gives you the idea that IE (vs. any other bundled browser) drives traffic towards MSN? There's only 3 places historically that Windows users had "unsolicited" links to MSN--on the Windows desktop (going back to Win95), as a Favorite in IE, and as the default homepage (that most people change). The first never had anything to do with IE--in fact, Win95 retail didn't even include IE!--you had to buy the Plus! pack or pirate the OEM-only Win95B or C. The last 2 would have been just as effective with any other browser bundled with Windows--include a bookmark in Netscape & set the default homepage to MSN.
Let's see... Internet Explorer has cost Microsoft billions when you go all the way back to 1995. Between antitrust lawsuits, bribes to AOL (a decade ago), legal fees, support costs, a seemingly endless number of security holes, the ActiveX debacle, the "MSVM" settlement, unhappy OEMs who couldn't bundle competing browsers, unhappy customers who have had to deal with malware, continuing to support 4 versions of IE, etc., etc., etc.--I just don't understand why Microsoft didn't pull the plug on IE 5 years ago...
.NET is the only browser-specific technology Microsoft seems to truly employ... If Microsoft would have just partnered with another browser (Firefox, Chrome, Safari, even Netscape, etc.), their bottom line would be much better. IE never drove sales of any other Microsoft product--how many people do you know have said "well, I need to buy a PC with Windows over a Mac because I want IE!" IE just came along for the ride with other Microsoft apps (Windows, Office, Visual Studio, games, etc.) for the sole purpose of killing Netscape... In retrospect, what was the point?
The worst part about it is that
What if I'm an anti-Chinese blogger that catches the ire of someone in the Chinese government... Worse, what if my words cause economic harm to China--bad for them but great for my blog... They put out an arrest warrant for me for "defaming"... Now, while I wouldn't fear extradition from the US over my freedom of speech, does this mean that I'm in danger of being extradited to China should I travel to a country that has a liberal extradition treaty with China? Sure sounds like it...
I agree with another poster--it's time for some basic "global laws." It's too bad the UN is too gridlocked and useless to prevent situations like these from happening...
I'm not too happy with this ambitious release schedule unless they dump Vista. Simply put, Microsoft will have to continue to support multiple operating systems for YEARS. By the time Win7 is released, Microsoft will be supporting Windows 2000, XP, Vista, and 7--both 32 and 64-bit versions. That's 8 operating systems. (W2K will continue to receive security fixes through June, 2010 and yes, there was a very rare 64-bit OEM version of W2K).
We all know the general consensus is that most present XP users will stick with XP and a LOT of Vista folks won't want to shell out $$$ for "Vista SP3." So, here's what I propose... First, Microsoft could save-face by offering all users of Vista, including OEM ones, free upgrades to Win7. That might even be enough to kill off some of the Vista lawsuits. An existing Vista license key can be used to install the equivalent edition of Win7. Second, there would be no such thing as Win7 "Home Basic", just Win7 "Home". Microsoft could make a new low-end Win7 "Netbook Edition", which has already been implied. To help entice people to switch, Vista Home Basic license keys install Win7 "Home" (Premium)--so those users get a step up. With that program, Microsoft puts the nails in Vista's coffin--they announce they would cease making bugfixes for Vista when Win7-SP1 is released and security fixes for Vista cease 6 months later.
This has a few benefits. First, very few companies would scream since Vista deployment is rare. Second, Microsoft can now say "yes, Windows 7 is a smaller release". Finally, while it's a financial hit up front from all the Vista upgrades, Microsoft can focus on fixing bugs in Win7 only and providing security hotfixes for XP and Win7.
But such a plan would make too much sense...
Go back to 1996. As part of some sort of agreement, Microsoft included AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, and/or WOW on the Win95B, Win98, and WinMe installation CDs. This was because somebody was complaining about Microsoft using their OS to sell MSN.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. NO converter boxes with component video are coupon-eligible. The only valid outputs are RF coax (ch3/4), composite (RCA yellow jack), and S-Video. A "coupon-eligible converter box" ("CECB") is limited by law to no more than 480i resolution.
True, but since the article specifically talks about banks, how many banks do you know of load 3rd party advertisements, especially on their online banking site? Sure, the bank might have some banner ads, usually for their own services like overdraft protection or mortgages, but no real bank would allow someone else to control even part of what appears to the end-user on their online banking site... You can bet that whatever banner ads appear are all hosted internally.
From TFA: "Klein says placing a low-profile piece of malicious JavaScript on a high-profile Website isn't difficult to do, and the malware is basically invisible to the user."
I don't see how any well-designed high-profile site wouldn't account for the possibility it might get hacked, let alone not have an automated method for undoing the damage... A simple approach would be to generate an MD5 checksum from each file (i.e. ASP, JPG, flash) and compare it to the MD5 checksums of what they're "supposed" to be. Generate & compare every 15 or 30 seconds. If there's a discrepancy, copy the file back from a read-only source and send an administrative alert. Hell, it's a simple VBScript...
Wrong. It was Win95. I remember because I had to get permission from my parents to come home past my curfew. By the Win98 era, I was living on my own in another city...
This is nothing new... Microsoft did the exact same thing in '94-'95 with Windows 95, only back then we got our leaked betas by way of pirate BBSs and 28.8 modems. This unofficial beta test put pre-release Win95 in the hands of thousands of computer geeks, who ended up lining up outside CompUSAs, Computer Citys, and Best Buys to get their copies of Win95 at 12:00am on 8/24/95... Win95's positive buzz was a direct result of the leaked betas.
Now, Windows 7 needs to deliver just like Win95 did in terms of app compatibility, drivers, and improvements...
Oh, and for the guy above who said that Vista's driver issue has improved--it really hasn't. People just replaced their older hardware, so the improvement is mostly perception.
This is to prevent unfit users from not using one of the other browsae.
for everyone's sake, I hope that's a fucking typo.
Fixed... "This is to prevent unfit users from not using one of the other browsæ."
Linux has made inroads in cheap ultra-portables. Windows has no-where to go. It's too slow for ultra-portables, it's too low quality for a luxury product.
Since when is a $300-400 netbook PC a "luxury product"? When Toshiba Librettos were the only such product on the market in '96-'99, they were $2000--in "10+ years ago money". Now that's a "luxury product". Plus, a netbook with 512MB RAM and a 1.6GHz Atom processor (which, BTW, has hyper-threading) is easily 15x the minimum requirements for XP Home, and can run that 7-year-old OS quite admirably... So no, it's not "too slow for ultra-portables."
No, just flying chairs
Why not flying toasters?
DA!
Nope. 1GB is 16x the minimum required for XP Home and XP Pro, which require a minimum of 64MB. Even if you follow Microsoft's recommended minimum of 128MB, 1GB is still 8x the minimum.
The way I see it, if you have a fault in your memory, wouldn't the constant swapping in/out of a page file be MORE dangerous since now it affects everything that goes into that physical address? I'd assume that without a page file, memory stays much more constant than it would with a page file--after all, there's nothing to be gained by swapping data between addresses in physical memory... (In fact, it would just waste CPU cycles). So, if you have a fault, wouldn't you want to turn off the page file so that fault has the opportunity to do the least amount of damage to data?