The widgets included with Vista aren't that great, but there are a bunch of downloadable sidebar tools I use; a CPU/RAM meter, a HD space meter, a NIC traffic meter, a gadget to show me my current public IP address, etc.
A new head of Microsoft would have a monumental amount of work to fix the company.
Step 1 - Kill off the Ballmer turds like Zune, Xbox, and maybe even search
Step 2 - Mass firings of everyone involved in those stinkers
Seriously, dude? I can see search, but the Xbox and Zune have both had reasonable amounts of success. There is no reason to kill off either one of them.
Step 3 - A complete overhaul of the marketing, branding, and UI people
Step 4 - Wrap up everything DOS/Win32 into a virtual machine and move forward with a clean slate while still supporting the gargantuan DOS/Win32 legacy code out there
Step 5 - Start coming to terms with open source and open standards and figure out how Microsoft will fit in that type of world
Hell, why not go all the way and grab some BSD source and build on top of that with the DOS/Win32 stuff running in a VM on top of it.
Nobody said anything about Microsoft going bankrupt. The fact is that they are slowly losing their stranglehold on the personal desktop market. Whether or not they can survive financially is irrelevant.
Oh, where to begin.
I have not met a person who has used Office 2007 and chose specifically to go back to 2003 (And this is a university setting here, with all sorts of stupidity and entitlement flying around.) The fact is that Office 2007's interface is totally superior to that of earlier office versions, and to OpenOffice.org. The only issue that ANYONE can cite is that it is different. But unlike other application UI changes, if you sit down with the new ribbon for five minutes or less (and I have complete confidence in this), you will quickly be doing everything you could do before and more, because the layout is far more logical and natural.
The most interesting part of the touch UI is not the eye candy, it's the Task Bar, which seems to have morphed into a pie menu. What the heck are they talking about? The task bar is still there, plain as day, at the beginning of the presentation. The only place you see a pie menu is during the maps manipulation segment, and that may just be the nature of the application.
The only expectations I hold for Windows 7 are for it to not work worse than Vista (seeing as Vista hasn't given me a single problem on any machine so far), and since Windows 7 will be based on a revision of Vista, I think this is a safe expectation.
What I'm most concerned about is this so-called "Windows 7 Demo" that has come out doesn't actually show any change in the UI--It just shows some touch-screen capabilities. I think there are a couple UI improvements that can be made that would make life easier for everyone.
Thing is, he was soliciting campaign donations and writing partisan stuff. I love this half-baked attempt on the poster's part to try and draw these facts to our immediate attention to incite outrage, despite the fact that what he was doing was clearly inappropriate use of work time.
Well, I guess not totally unbelievable. Slashdot readers are capable of complaining about both Vista's biggest non-imaginary problem (hardware compatibility) and in the same post, complaining about the solution (building on the existing core rather than rewriting again, thereby making new driver development much simpler).
Except that's bad advice. Buying a machine from, for example, Dell, with Linux pre-installed means that that PC has the same guarantee as Dell's Windows PCs as far as hardware compatibility, which means fewer headaches for you as a user. That alone should be worth a slightly higher price, if you're going to be installing Linux on it anyway. This also counts toward telling manufacturers that there's actually a demand for Linux, which will drive them to improve support for it--a "drop in the bucket", as you put it, but after a while they start to add up.
Slashdot Mirror
lmao, looks like you're the only one who cares here, friend.
Well I guess I'm ok, then. And I'm going to give you the courtesy of assuming you did, in fact, read my whole post.
lmao, I'll keep my geek badge, thanks. There's nothing wrong with Vista.
I would switch to Linux (probably of the debian variety), but there are certain things not available that I really like. I already dual-boot as it is.
If by "believe" you mean "think they exist", I certainly believe in Vista and SP1, since I see them both every day.
The Easter Bunny and Santa Claus are things I'm skeptical about, along with your comprehension of reality.
Personally I'd rather Google developed a whole new desktop office suite... preferable one that wasn't a total hog.
*Cough*
Hello, Twitter, how's the weather in la-la-land?
And the Twitters shall inherit the earth.
The widgets included with Vista aren't that great, but there are a bunch of downloadable sidebar tools I use; a CPU/RAM meter, a HD space meter, a NIC traffic meter, a gadget to show me my current public IP address, etc.
Not giving handouts to those who have little is NOT the same as taking things away from them.
A new head of Microsoft would have a monumental amount of work to fix the company.
Step 1 - Kill off the Ballmer turds like Zune, Xbox, and maybe even search
Step 2 - Mass firings of everyone involved in those stinkers
Seriously, dude? I can see search, but the Xbox and Zune have both had reasonable amounts of success. There is no reason to kill off either one of them.
Step 3 - A complete overhaul of the marketing, branding, and UI people
Step 4 - Wrap up everything DOS/Win32 into a virtual machine and move forward with a clean slate while still supporting the gargantuan DOS/Win32 legacy code out there
Step 5 - Start coming to terms with open source and open standards and figure out how Microsoft will fit in that type of world
Hell, why not go all the way and grab some BSD source and build on top of that with the DOS/Win32 stuff running in a VM on top of it.
I can agree with these.Yes they were. MS Word and IE aren't exactly the pinnacle of software achievement, but they were still better than either of those were.
Nobody said anything about Microsoft going bankrupt. The fact is that they are slowly losing their stranglehold on the personal desktop market. Whether or not they can survive financially is irrelevant.
I'm not dismissing those who don't, I'm dismissing those who lament it when it is clearly (in my experience) so successful.
Or because those extensions are mostly proprietary and hard for volunteer developers to reverse-engineer...
Oh, where to begin. I have not met a person who has used Office 2007 and chose specifically to go back to 2003 (And this is a university setting here, with all sorts of stupidity and entitlement flying around.) The fact is that Office 2007's interface is totally superior to that of earlier office versions, and to OpenOffice.org. The only issue that ANYONE can cite is that it is different. But unlike other application UI changes, if you sit down with the new ribbon for five minutes or less (and I have complete confidence in this), you will quickly be doing everything you could do before and more, because the layout is far more logical and natural.
The NSA didn't touch it, did they?
No, Developers kick Linux's ass on both. There's a difference.
I understood, thanks, I was just responding.
The only expectations I hold for Windows 7 are for it to not work worse than Vista (seeing as Vista hasn't given me a single problem on any machine so far), and since Windows 7 will be based on a revision of Vista, I think this is a safe expectation.
What I'm most concerned about is this so-called "Windows 7 Demo" that has come out doesn't actually show any change in the UI--It just shows some touch-screen capabilities. I think there are a couple UI improvements that can be made that would make life easier for everyone.
Well, I guess not totally unbelievable. Slashdot readers are capable of complaining about both Vista's biggest non-imaginary problem (hardware compatibility) and in the same post, complaining about the solution (building on the existing core rather than rewriting again, thereby making new driver development much simpler).
The last thing anyone needs is for Microsoft to be even less open than it already is.
Except that's bad advice. Buying a machine from, for example, Dell, with Linux pre-installed means that that PC has the same guarantee as Dell's Windows PCs as far as hardware compatibility, which means fewer headaches for you as a user. That alone should be worth a slightly higher price, if you're going to be installing Linux on it anyway. This also counts toward telling manufacturers that there's actually a demand for Linux, which will drive them to improve support for it--a "drop in the bucket", as you put it, but after a while they start to add up.