Bizarre. I said nothing there in favor of Microsoft. I was just clarifying misinformation coming from journalists reporting that the "x" button was what caused the upgrades. Which might lead someone to interpret it as "I'll reboot my computer instead, that will fix it!", or "I'll be smart and kill it with task manager instead!"
That is why this is deceptive. Microsoft knows the customers are not expecting to have to actively opt-out and that most are likely to just close the box instead of reading it closely. They probably have some tech savvy friends saying "Windows will never upgrade itself unless you agree" (and I know some of them).
Agile is a pain. New style programmers on jobs where everything can be broken down into two week sprints, like web pages. Continual testing is extremely difficult on many embedded systems where testing has to be done manually or with specially crafted builds (taking more time than the original code). It's doable, but I don't need some snot nosed kid telling me that I have to use the latest fad and that my life will become easier. Agile makes programmers work harder and more hours, with less long term planning.
Oh, stateless transactions and interfaces are old technology. But good job for people thinking they discovered a new concept.
They do all sorts of nonsense. Ie, when people in W8 preview discovered registry setting to skip the Metro start screen and boot straight to desktop, that removed that in the next update. It didn't hurt Microsoft, the vast majority of users would never have used it or known about it, and yet...
The "x" does what you think it does. It closes the notification. It does not cause upgrades to happen, and it does not stop upgrades from happening, it only closes the window. The problem is that the update is scheduled already by the time that notification appears, and you must cancel the scheduled upgrade while still in that windows instead of closing it.
IoT needs to be super small and super power efficient, yes. Some may need to run on a battery fro 10 to 20 years. Not for the stupid "tell me if my coffee maker is ready" apps for gadget lovers, but for industrial use, sensor use, etc.
Streetlights, traffic lights, electric meters, gas meters, transmission lines, water mains, gas mains, and so forth. None of it intended for consumers.
That's consumer IoT. I think it's a dumb idea, and I work in the IoT industry (non-consumer). Things like Nest are silly and ship with broken features (horrendous security), and Google is naive in trying to enter a field they know nothing about. Everyone's working at cross purposes everywhere, multiple competing standards that are not anywhere near what is required (networks too chatty for battery use, or bulky data like XML, etc).
Yes and no. Security needs to be built in. People are in a rush to get on the bandwagon, and kids don't care about security, so it's left off of consumer IoT. But it's there in the professional stuff.
The current chips need three things for IoT, and the ball is only barely starting to roll from chip makers: Radio (sub gigahertz, not lame zigbee or wifi), Security, and Low Power. Those last two sort of fight with each other though. Hardware security features suck up power, though you don't have to use it all the time; software based security is even worse since it takes more time before you can drop back to low power mode. No one is really supporting PKI, very few people have secure key storage (ie so you can't sniff it out on the bus or with jtag), etc. Low power is an afterthought, a lot of consumer grade IoT assume you're recharging every day, dumb bluetooth things talking to your phone for example (not really IoT but people slap that label on), you want a a few microamp of sleep current if you want decent battery life, or less.
The majority of companies world wide were in trouble at that time. There was the recession if you're too young to remember. The investors probably went along with a futile buyout because it would get them a short term return even though it accelerated the demise. Price goes up a bit, sell it all, sit back and watch the ship sink. Microsoft guaranteed it would fail, Nokia if left alone at least had a chance of success with self determination.
They were going to be Meego, Maemo. Better than any crappy Windows phone and potentially real competition against Android or iPhone. Symbian developers were in the minority at Nokia. It was an engineering company and not a stupid apps producer. They had a respected research group (that Microsoft did not buy, they wouldn't want actual smarts tainting their image).
Yes the old style phones were declining. Android was only one problem, bigger problem was losing out their core non smart phone business to cheap junk cutting into profits from below. But they were investing in new changes and products. They'd have been better off going alone than to have Microsoft come in and gut them. Which the majority of workers wanted. But Microsoft engineered a takeover. We'll never see if they could have recovered, but at least there was a chance of that instead of zero chance when the Elop engineered a takeover. At least Elop got screwed too by not becoming the new Microsoft CEO.
Microsoft was inept and incompetent. They knew *nothing* about phones and yet dictated that Nokia cancel all work on their own phones, even those already in beta testing and ready to ship, and start working on crappy Windows phones. If they really did try to make money then Microsoft leadership are utter morons. If their plan was to destroy Nokia then they were geniuses.
Besides, they did make promises which they are breaking. It's not stated but was probably in writing though maybe not in contract form. Even if only verbal form that's still bad enough that no one should ever be defending Microsoft over such a move. And yet even here on Slashdot we have some sockpuppets defending Microsoft. It's like a Monty Python sketch in real life:
Reporter: I've been told Dinsdale Piranha nailed your head to the floor.
Man: No. Never! He was a smashing bloke. He used to buy his mother flowers and that. He was like a brother to me.
Reporter: But the police have film of Dinsdale actually nailing your head to the floor.
Man: Oh yeah, he did that.
Reporter: Why?
Man: Well he had to, didn't he? I mean there was nothing else he could do. I had transgressed the unwritten law.
Because in Europe the governments usually aren't so rigidly hands-off like the laissez-faire utopia of America. They were naive in assuming Microsoft wouldn't blatantly lie to them and work against their own interests by creating crappy products, work against the interests of the customers by making products no one wanted, and working against the interests of their workers.
Naw, the decline is because they put so much hope into a single company. They are diversified but not enough. There's a lot of engineering skills there.
Microsoft has been late to the party so often, always thinking they can dominate the market they know nothing about. Why they could possibly do if they left thngs alone instead of trying to do things the Microsoft way.
Nokia was blamed by Germany in the past, for not going through with promises to have a major manufacturing area there, but the downturn in phones meant they pulled back.
Slashdot Mirror
Bizarre. I said nothing there in favor of Microsoft. I was just clarifying misinformation coming from journalists reporting that the "x" button was what caused the upgrades. Which might lead someone to interpret it as "I'll reboot my computer instead, that will fix it!", or "I'll be smart and kill it with task manager instead!"
That is why this is deceptive. Microsoft knows the customers are not expecting to have to actively opt-out and that most are likely to just close the box instead of reading it closely. They probably have some tech savvy friends saying "Windows will never upgrade itself unless you agree" (and I know some of them).
Agile is a pain. New style programmers on jobs where everything can be broken down into two week sprints, like web pages. Continual testing is extremely difficult on many embedded systems where testing has to be done manually or with specially crafted builds (taking more time than the original code). It's doable, but I don't need some snot nosed kid telling me that I have to use the latest fad and that my life will become easier. Agile makes programmers work harder and more hours, with less long term planning.
Oh, stateless transactions and interfaces are old technology. But good job for people thinking they discovered a new concept.
It is highly deceptive. But claiming that the "x" installs windows is also deceptive, or uninformed.
They do all sorts of nonsense. Ie, when people in W8 preview discovered registry setting to skip the Metro start screen and boot straight to desktop, that removed that in the next update. It didn't hurt Microsoft, the vast majority of users would never have used it or known about it, and yet...
Even if they charge, they'll keep the ads. Though I suspect they may extend the free period.
The key registry setting will actually delete any partially downloaded Windows 10 folder if it detects it.
The Never10 utility does this. Very small so easy to download.
Never saw anything remotely like this on OSX. Don't have iPhone. Android updates, but you're notified clearly, never tricked, and you can defer it.
The "x" does what you think it does. It closes the notification. It does not cause upgrades to happen, and it does not stop upgrades from happening, it only closes the window. The problem is that the update is scheduled already by the time that notification appears, and you must cancel the scheduled upgrade while still in that windows instead of closing it.
And then the millenials and hipsters defend it, saying "microsoft needs to make a profit, so why is everyone so grumpy?"
IoT needs to be super small and super power efficient, yes. Some may need to run on a battery fro 10 to 20 years. Not for the stupid "tell me if my coffee maker is ready" apps for gadget lovers, but for industrial use, sensor use, etc.
Streetlights, traffic lights, electric meters, gas meters, transmission lines, water mains, gas mains, and so forth. None of it intended for consumers.
Yup. People who've grown up on PCs and Windows are surprised to learn that they're decades behind in their knowledge.
That's consumer IoT. I think it's a dumb idea, and I work in the IoT industry (non-consumer). Things like Nest are silly and ship with broken features (horrendous security), and Google is naive in trying to enter a field they know nothing about. Everyone's working at cross purposes everywhere, multiple competing standards that are not anywhere near what is required (networks too chatty for battery use, or bulky data like XML, etc).
Yes and no. Security needs to be built in. People are in a rush to get on the bandwagon, and kids don't care about security, so it's left off of consumer IoT. But it's there in the professional stuff.
The current chips need three things for IoT, and the ball is only barely starting to roll from chip makers: Radio (sub gigahertz, not lame zigbee or wifi), Security, and Low Power. Those last two sort of fight with each other though. Hardware security features suck up power, though you don't have to use it all the time; software based security is even worse since it takes more time before you can drop back to low power mode. No one is really supporting PKI, very few people have secure key storage (ie so you can't sniff it out on the bus or with jtag), etc. Low power is an afterthought, a lot of consumer grade IoT assume you're recharging every day, dumb bluetooth things talking to your phone for example (not really IoT but people slap that label on), you want a a few microamp of sleep current if you want decent battery life, or less.
The majority of companies world wide were in trouble at that time. There was the recession if you're too young to remember. The investors probably went along with a futile buyout because it would get them a short term return even though it accelerated the demise. Price goes up a bit, sell it all, sit back and watch the ship sink. Microsoft guaranteed it would fail, Nokia if left alone at least had a chance of success with self determination.
They were going to be Meego, Maemo. Better than any crappy Windows phone and potentially real competition against Android or iPhone. Symbian developers were in the minority at Nokia. It was an engineering company and not a stupid apps producer. They had a respected research group (that Microsoft did not buy, they wouldn't want actual smarts tainting their image).
Yes the old style phones were declining. Android was only one problem, bigger problem was losing out their core non smart phone business to cheap junk cutting into profits from below. But they were investing in new changes and products. They'd have been better off going alone than to have Microsoft come in and gut them. Which the majority of workers wanted. But Microsoft engineered a takeover. We'll never see if they could have recovered, but at least there was a chance of that instead of zero chance when the Elop engineered a takeover. At least Elop got screwed too by not becoming the new Microsoft CEO.
Microsoft was inept and incompetent. They knew *nothing* about phones and yet dictated that Nokia cancel all work on their own phones, even those already in beta testing and ready to ship, and start working on crappy Windows phones. If they really did try to make money then Microsoft leadership are utter morons. If their plan was to destroy Nokia then they were geniuses.
Besides, they did make promises which they are breaking. It's not stated but was probably in writing though maybe not in contract form. Even if only verbal form that's still bad enough that no one should ever be defending Microsoft over such a move. And yet even here on Slashdot we have some sockpuppets defending Microsoft. It's like a Monty Python sketch in real life:
Reporter: I've been told Dinsdale Piranha nailed your head to the floor.
Man: No. Never! He was a smashing bloke. He used to buy his mother flowers and that. He was like a brother to me.
Reporter: But the police have film of Dinsdale actually nailing your head to the floor.
Man: Oh yeah, he did that.
Reporter: Why?
Man: Well he had to, didn't he? I mean there was nothing else he could do. I had transgressed the unwritten law.
Because in Europe the governments usually aren't so rigidly hands-off like the laissez-faire utopia of America. They were naive in assuming Microsoft wouldn't blatantly lie to them and work against their own interests by creating crappy products, work against the interests of the customers by making products no one wanted, and working against the interests of their workers.
Except that Microsoft dictated what products Nokia would make! Or Elop did, as the cuckoo's egg from Microsoft.
Naw, the decline is because they put so much hope into a single company. They are diversified but not enough. There's a lot of engineering skills there.
Microsoft has been late to the party so often, always thinking they can dominate the market they know nothing about. Why they could possibly do if they left thngs alone instead of trying to do things the Microsoft way.
Nokia was blamed by Germany in the past, for not going through with promises to have a major manufacturing area there, but the downturn in phones meant they pulled back.
If you deal with businesses you may expect a half measure of truth. With Microsoft, it's a heaping cup of lies.
They did make promises to invest, and reneged on that.