Especially when you consider in the speccy vs cbm64 debte the cbm64 was clearly superior a feat later recreated when commodore drubbed the st for general use:)
In my view this is really totally unacceptable. If for any reason I need to reinstall the operating system (this is really my choice to do this), then I don't want to be dictated to HOW I should do this. I really have no choice but to run a version of windows at home as a lot of the research I do for my job is windows based and I'm not about to go changing what I do for a living because I want to move to linux (I do actually run linux on another machine). There is NO REASON whatsoever for microsoft to stop me from installing an upgrade version by booting from the disk and then when prompted inserting my full copy of my previous version of windows in and entering the software key that I paid money for.
In fact this is a sales and marketing decision and nothing else, its really quite disgusting they have done this. Luckily I will be needing the ultimate version so hopefully this WILL install in the "classic way", otherwise I will be forced to buy a full copy which is significantly more expensive. I resent that, and much as I doubt it will change anything I just wanted to state publicly that no matter how big a company is or how "important" its product is, it can all end tomorrow if your customers stop buying.
There is a reason you remain anonymous here you are an ill-informed, opinionated person who probably thinks every system HAS to be lightning fast.
The fact is it doesn't Java is not as fast as natively compiled languages allthough the jits etc help, you are behind the times if you think psuedo interpreted languages are unimportant and I pity you.
The reason I see for MS not doing this is two fold
1) Microsoft clearly don't have a clue about security.
2) Microsoft don't care, they see users are happy to purchase an os with a flawed security model and are happy to pay norton and sophos for their scanning programs.
Eventually when there are enough computer literate people in the world, something that is happening very quickly, peoples level of education towards security will change. At that point microsoft will be in trouble IMHO.
The trouble is at the moment MS seems to be an unstoppable force, but then again so have many companies and they've learned the hard way to.
Being a developer who sits in editors all day
I was absolutely amazed when a workmate said to
me that I should perhaps code my for loops differently to allow for "microsoft shitness" in the scoping of variables. Like all software this is a bug and therefore excusable. What is NOT correct in my opinion is then coding LARGE well used libraries to rely on this bug to then compile thus locking people into using an incorrect scoping method.
Slashdot Mirror
Especially when you consider in the speccy vs cbm64 debte the cbm64 was clearly superior a feat later recreated when commodore drubbed the st for general use :)
In my view this is really totally unacceptable. If for any reason I need to reinstall the operating system (this is really my choice to do this), then I don't want to be dictated to HOW I should do this. I really have no choice but to run a version of windows at home as a lot of the research I do for my job is windows based and I'm not about to go changing what I do for a living because I want to move to linux (I do actually run linux on another machine). There is NO REASON whatsoever for microsoft to stop me from installing an upgrade version by booting from the disk and then when prompted inserting my full copy of my previous version of windows in and entering the software key that I paid money for.
In fact this is a sales and marketing decision and nothing else, its really quite disgusting they have done this. Luckily I will be needing the ultimate version so hopefully this WILL install in the "classic way", otherwise I will be forced to buy a full copy which is significantly more expensive. I resent that, and much as I doubt it will change anything I just wanted to state publicly that no matter how big a company is or how "important" its product is, it can all end tomorrow if your customers stop buying.
There is a reason you remain anonymous here you are an ill-informed, opinionated person who probably thinks every system HAS to be lightning fast.
The fact is it doesn't Java is not as fast as natively compiled languages allthough the jits etc help, you are behind the times if you think psuedo interpreted languages are unimportant and I pity you.
The reason I see for MS not doing this is two fold
1) Microsoft clearly don't have a clue about security.
2) Microsoft don't care, they see users are happy to purchase an os with a flawed security model and are happy to pay norton and sophos for their scanning programs.
Eventually when there are enough computer literate people in the world, something that is happening very quickly, peoples level of education towards security will change. At that point microsoft will be in trouble IMHO.
The trouble is at the moment MS seems to be an unstoppable force, but then again so have many companies and they've learned the hard way to.
Now... where is my linux cd
Being a developer who sits in editors all day
I was absolutely amazed when a workmate said to
me that I should perhaps code my for loops differently to allow for "microsoft shitness" in the scoping of variables. Like all software this is a bug and therefore excusable. What is NOT correct in my opinion is then coding LARGE well used libraries to rely on this bug to then compile thus locking people into using an incorrect scoping method.
This is just plain wrong imho !!
Rod