To get Microsoft Certified a program *had* to write to it's own folders, and the registry..... now they must not write to their own folders or large parts of the registry
Many of the programs that cause problems are the ones with the Designed for Windows xx logo or are Microsoft programs...!
The problem is that many "old" programs "Work just fine" on previous versions and only the security theatre in Vista stops them running...
UAC is triggered by older programs, why can't Vista recognise it is an older program automatically, sandbox it... and stop annoying me!
Asynchronous JavaScript and XML the X = XML Not Microsoft Not ActiveX ?
XmlHttpRequest was a Microsoft technology....in the very beginning
But Ajax as it is now does not have to be XML, or Javascript, or Asynchronous in fact it is a merger of the various systems before Microsoft first designed XmlHttpRequest ?
The filesystem is a working version of what Microsoft were trying to do with WinFS (you might remember that this was supposed to be in Vista, but was withdrawn because they could not get it working....)
Encyclopedia Britannica a failed experiment in publisher generated content, Verifiable seems to mean someone published a book, newspaper, with it in, and no one checked if was actually true....
Wikipedia is not a primary source Britannica is not a primary source Newspapers are rarely a primary source
UK has an established church (Anglican) and the Prime Minister officially selects Bishops Prime minister retires (Tony Blair) and finally admits he is religious and a Christian
USA has a division of Church and State written into it's constitution President has to swear by God at his inauguration and could not get elected if he were not a known church going Christian
This is why the USA has "officially" a division between Church and State... in theory....
The problem is that if the people running the Large Hadron Collider did not believe that hadrons do not exist as real tangible particles and are just mathematical models and do not really collide then the experiments done thus far would have exactly the same results... It does not matter what you believe the results are the same....
If you do not have believe in your model (i.e. you do not have faith that is a good model and probably correct, or at least more correct then the alternatives) then you are unlikely to pursue it but if it *is* right (or at least more correct than the alternatives) then it will work anyway
WinFS : Microsoft's aborted attempt at a database file system.......the same idea had been tried years before, was was fount to be not worth it, and people who looked at what microsoft had done said "we tried it that way initially, but it we found it couldn't work, so we did it a different way..."
Microsoft reinventing the wheel... again... badly....
Please take your copyright case to court and try that... if you did not register (and pay to do so) then you did not show interest in maintaining you copyright and so the damages will be less.... much less.... so yes automatic but limited....
Apple DO NOT sell operating systems.....they sell Macs! You buy the hardware, the operating system and the peripherals as a package all from Apple as a *system*
People buy the system because it is trendy, good looking, and it works!
Microsoft sell operating systems, and application software, it is a different but overlapping market
Linux - no-one really has any idea how many systems are out there because nobody has a reliable way of counting them, [the figures for Microsoft are also suspect, how many system are bought with Windows and retrofitted with another operating system, I suspect Microsoft count a system bought with Vista and downgraded to XP as two sales...?] the 1% figure for Linux is often quoted but is not reliable, you can't count sales because only a few systems are sold (and those are for maintenance) you can't count downloads because 1 download does not equal 1 install, and you cannot count installs because they do not have to be registered?
Over 50% of all webservers run Apache and the majority of those probably run on Linux/BSD/Other Unix system, but even this is difficult to count....
China told Microsoft to shove it because the Pirated versions cost the same but worked better (no licensing getting in the way, no limited mode, no accusations of piracy when they had actually bought a legit copy)
Move to Europe, where you cannot patent it, and copyright is automatic........the US IP system is broken and will stay so while large companies control it...
Will Microsoft give Windows away free.... to large OEM's they almost do now, they will charge as much as they can, this may be nothing if that is all the OEM's will pay...
Will they OpenSource it...never! from experience the code is so horrible and Microsoft gain so much by it being closed source (except to them) that they will never even consider it...
The difference is that an.MSI installer was written by the site you just downloaded it from and you either trust them or not...
The Package selected from the package manager is in a repository and has been verified as non-malicious by the keeper of the repository... who has a reputation to keep....
If you install a raw unsigned.DEB or.RPM then it is no different than an.MSI (or other installer)
All the Gnome users now hate you because you don't like Gnome All the KDE users now hate you because you don't like KDE All the other desktop users now hate you because you didn't mention their desktop
A Linux Distro is not a desktop... most allow you to pick which one of many you wish to use (but have a default) if the Linux community picked one desktop today then tomorrow 10 new projects would start to pull that desktop in 10 different directions (simplicity, coolness, completeness etc..) from the original desktop because users can never agree what they want...
Microsoft do not seem to have learnt this... they have a new desktop interface for each version of Windows which is supposed to be a one size fits all, and it turns into a one size fits no-one... I know people who like Vista's Aero desktop and some who prefer XP's "Candy" and some who prefer the "Classic" Windows 2000 simple interface, but all would pick and choose bits from each to make their perfect desktop... on Linux this is possible (mostly)
apt-get is only used by people who already know what they are doing.....
Everyone else on ubuntu uses Synaptic
Debian/Ubuntu is not a one size fits all since it does not suit everyone, it cannot support some repositories (because they are RPM based) and it has some non-standard file locations so some installers and builders fail...
This is why Xubuntu/Kubuntu/MythBuntu/Ubuntu Studio...etc... exist they are preconfigured installers for subsets of Ubuntu so you don't have to reconfigure it yourself (and so you can install it at all on a minimal machine) and why there are other distros out there Debian/Ubuntu has a large share but it is not to everyones taste (and that fact that Debian still exists now Ubuntu is so popular shows this...)
The fact that use use Debian but say Debian / Ubuntu says everything... they are distinctly not the same thing...
This is the modification of Archbishop James Ushers date and is actually quite a good estimate of the start of recorded history.... the only assumption he made was that recorded history = history = age of the earth
The difference is that the package manager will do the install of the verified installation package(s), while MSI will run the unverified install script which will install the program and do whatever else the installer asks including running any programs requested, and at no point does Windows know if it is the installer, the installed program, or the user, or another program that was running in the background, trying to do anything at any time...
Clients are still using windows - no cost Clients are still using Outlook - no cost Clients notice no difference - no cost
Admins need to be retrained and installation and configuration time are the only costs
If it costs "several hundred thousand dollars" to install this on the servers then your admins are robbing you blind with each upgrade of Exchange since this is about as complex and time consuming
There are expenses involved but these are limited to a one off more than an exchange update, then a repeated only as much as exchange maintainence and upgrades without the cost of exchange
The cost of an OEM copy of Windows is irrelevant to this since the money you save is on Exchange and not on Windows (you may save one licence per installation of exchange)
The problem is there is in Windows no difference between an interactive task and an interactive task that presents no interface, this means that UAC has to prompt for the very very obvious like "did you really press the button marked install" because it has no idea if the user did something or it was done for them...
Because Microsoft does not have a proper installer interface that installs programs for you.. instead each program has it's own installer/updater Windows has no control over the process and does not know if the user has been asked or not... Unix style package management systems are one solution where the install is managed by one system which asks the users permission then monitors the installation process...
Slashdot Mirror
To get Microsoft Certified a program *had* to write to it's own folders, and the registry ... .. now they must not write to their own folders or large parts of the registry
Many of the programs that cause problems are the ones with the Designed for Windows xx logo or are Microsoft programs ...!
The problem is that many "old" programs "Work just fine" on previous versions and only the security theatre in Vista stops them running ...
UAC is triggered by older programs, why can't Vista recognise it is an older program automatically, sandbox it ... and stop annoying me!
Short answer : No
Long answer : it's better than IE7 which is better than IE6 but it is still less standards compliant than some non-smartphone mobile browsers!
Alternative answer : It is fully standards compliant - i.e. it is fully compatible with IE8....
Asynchronous JavaScript and XML
the X = XML
Not Microsoft Not ActiveX ?
XmlHttpRequest was a Microsoft technology ....in the very beginning
But Ajax as it is now does not have to be XML, or Javascript, or Asynchronous in fact it is a merger of the various systems before Microsoft first designed XmlHttpRequest ?
And this is relevant how ...?
Sorry I live outside the USA so the coverage of both these events was available without silverlight
Windows CE (or whatever it is called) costs money to licence ... now they have developed it
Android costs money to licence
WebOS cost them nothing
They reinvented the wheel because the alternative wheels available at the time were expensive or old fashioned, and did not work very well ...
Windows mobile is notorious for being resource hungry (because it has the same API as Windows) and is not as stable as it should be
Nokia's Symbian has it's own problems ...
The Plan 9 guys invented UTF-8 as now used everywhere in most operating systems and the internet
Windows uses a strange kludged mixture of UTF-16 and Codepaged ASCII so that even it's own apps have trouble with the mixture ....
The filesystem is a working version of what Microsoft were trying to do with WinFS (you might remember that this was supposed to be in Vista, but was withdrawn because they could not get it working....)
Encyclopedia Britannica a failed experiment in publisher generated content, Verifiable seems to mean someone published a book, newspaper, with it in, and no one checked if was actually true ....
Wikipedia is not a primary source
Britannica is not a primary source
Newspapers are rarely a primary source
The difference
UK has an established church (Anglican) and the Prime Minister officially selects Bishops
Prime minister retires (Tony Blair) and finally admits he is religious and a Christian
USA has a division of Church and State written into it's constitution
President has to swear by God at his inauguration and could not get elected if he were not a known church going Christian
This is why the USA has "officially" a division between Church and State ... in theory....
The problem is that if the people running the Large Hadron Collider did not believe that hadrons do not exist as real tangible particles and are just mathematical models and do not really collide then the experiments done thus far would have exactly the same results ... It does not matter what you believe the results are the same ....
If you do not have believe in your model (i.e. you do not have faith that is a good model and probably correct, or at least more correct then the alternatives) then you are unlikely to pursue it but if it *is* right (or at least more correct than the alternatives) then it will work anyway
WinFS : Microsoft's aborted attempt at a database file system .... ...the same idea had been tried years before, was was fount to be not worth it, and people who looked at what microsoft had done said "we tried it that way initially, but it we found it couldn't work, so we did it a different way..."
Microsoft reinventing the wheel... again... badly....
Please take your copyright case to court and try that ... if you did not register (and pay to do so) then you did not show interest in maintaining you copyright and so the damages will be less.... much less.... so yes automatic but limited....
Apple DO NOT sell operating systems.....they sell Macs! You buy the hardware, the operating system and the peripherals as a package all from Apple as a *system*
People buy the system because it is trendy, good looking, and it works!
Microsoft sell operating systems, and application software, it is a different but overlapping market
Linux - no-one really has any idea how many systems are out there because nobody has a reliable way of counting them, [the figures for Microsoft are also suspect, how many system are bought with Windows and retrofitted with another operating system, I suspect Microsoft count a system bought with Vista and downgraded to XP as two sales...?] the 1% figure for Linux is often quoted but is not reliable, you can't count sales because only a few systems are sold (and those are for maintenance) you can't count downloads because 1 download does not equal 1 install, and you cannot count installs because they do not have to be registered?
Over 50% of all webservers run Apache and the majority of those probably run on Linux/BSD/Other Unix system, but even this is difficult to count ....
China told Microsoft to shove it because the Pirated versions cost the same but worked better (no licensing getting in the way, no limited mode, no accusations of piracy when they had actually bought a legit copy)
Move to Europe, where you cannot patent it, and copyright is automatic ..... ...the US IP system is broken and will stay so while large companies control it ...
Will Microsoft give Windows away free .... to large OEM's they almost do now, they will charge as much as they can, this may be nothing if that is all the OEM's will pay ...
Will they OpenSource it ...never! from experience the code is so horrible and Microsoft gain so much by it being closed source (except to them) that they will never even consider it ...
Wrong way round .... where is the - I am running as a user and need to *always* run this one app as an admin and it will break if I forget
The difference is that an .MSI installer was written by the site you just downloaded it from and you either trust them or not ...
The Package selected from the package manager is in a repository and has been verified as non-malicious by the keeper of the repository ... who has a reputation to keep ....
If you install a raw unsigned .DEB or .RPM then it is no different than an .MSI (or other installer)
All the Gnome users now hate you because you don't like Gnome
All the KDE users now hate you because you don't like KDE
All the other desktop users now hate you because you didn't mention their desktop
A Linux Distro is not a desktop ... most allow you to pick which one of many you wish to use (but have a default) if the Linux community picked one desktop today then tomorrow 10 new projects would start to pull that desktop in 10 different directions (simplicity, coolness, completeness etc..) from the original desktop because users can never agree what they want ...
Microsoft do not seem to have learnt this ... they have a new desktop interface for each version of Windows which is supposed to be a one size fits all, and it turns into a one size fits no-one ... I know people who like Vista's Aero desktop and some who prefer XP's "Candy" and some who prefer the "Classic" Windows 2000 simple interface, but all would pick and choose bits from each to make their perfect desktop ... on Linux this is possible (mostly)
apt-get is only used by people who already know what they are doing .....
Everyone else on ubuntu uses Synaptic
Debian/Ubuntu is not a one size fits all since it does not suit everyone, it cannot support some repositories (because they are RPM based) and it has some non-standard file locations so some installers and builders fail ...
This is why Xubuntu/Kubuntu/MythBuntu/Ubuntu Studio ...etc ... exist they are preconfigured installers for subsets of Ubuntu so you don't have to reconfigure it yourself (and so you can install it at all on a minimal machine) and why there are other distros out there Debian/Ubuntu has a large share but it is not to everyones taste (and that fact that Debian still exists now Ubuntu is so popular shows this...)
The fact that use use Debian but say Debian / Ubuntu says everything ... they are distinctly not the same thing ...
This is the modification of Archbishop James Ushers date and is actually quite a good estimate of the start of recorded history .... the only assumption he made was that recorded history = history = age of the earth
The difference is that the package manager will do the install of the verified installation package(s), while MSI will run the unverified install script which will install the program and do whatever else the installer asks including running any programs requested, and at no point does Windows know if it is the installer, the installed program, or the user, or another program that was running in the background, trying to do anything at any time...
Clients are still using windows - no cost
Clients are still using Outlook - no cost
Clients notice no difference - no cost
Admins need to be retrained and installation and configuration time are the only costs
If it costs "several hundred thousand dollars" to install this on the servers then your admins are robbing you blind with each upgrade of Exchange since this is about as complex and time consuming
There are expenses involved but these are limited to a one off more than an exchange update, then a repeated only as much as exchange maintainence and upgrades without the cost of exchange
The cost of an OEM copy of Windows is irrelevant to this since the money you save is on Exchange and not on Windows (you may save one licence per installation of exchange)
The problem is there is in Windows no difference between an interactive task and an interactive task that presents no interface, this means that UAC has to prompt for the very very obvious like "did you really press the button marked install" because it has no idea if the user did something or it was done for them ...
Because Microsoft does not have a proper installer interface that installs programs for you.. instead each program has it's own installer/updater Windows has no control over the process and does not know if the user has been asked or not ... Unix style package management systems are one solution where the install is managed by one system which asks the users permission then monitors the installation process ...
Friends is a soap with jokes not a sitcom ... we have homegrown versions of these as well and they are mostly written by committee here as well ...
They are popular not for the jokes but for the people, if they were not funny, people would still watch ...