Weren't 32-bit machines entry level before 1990? Yet, it took until MS shipped XP in 2001 before most consumers were running a 32-bit OS. We'll probably be running 64-bit Windows by 2030.
Only if Microsoft followed the advice of Slashdot posters and kludged large memory PAE support into 32-bit Windows.
4GB should be a pretty standard baseline configuration by next year, which means MS is pretty much forcing them to go 64-bit.
OK, I need you to break this down for me. How does pointing out that MS's illegal activities in 1996 with Compaq and other OEMs had little to do with Netscape delivering a pile of shit browser 5 years later in 2001?
Also how much Microsoft pay me for flaming decade-old products from dead software brands?
Finally, what size tard helmet do you wear? Would you say it's bigger or smaller than your typical watermelon? Please also tell me about your drool cup.
Yeah, it indicates that MS has become so bureaucratic that the left hand (marketing) can't even get the right hand (engineering) to fix the build scripts. Hardly sounds like a kick your competitors in the ass outfit anymore.
Either that and you take MS's explaination on face value, and it means the Windows development culture has become so corrupt that ISVs are now hardcoding version numbers into their apps to extort paid upgrades out of their customers.
(Hopefully the slashbot droid who called me a shill for posting about IE3 is reading this:)
I've heard talk about this "stable version" plan for a long time. It's a great idea, as much of Wikipedia is essentially "done", but it's never been implemented.
Hrm. Perhaps the wikimooks are too busy reverting Micheal Jackson edits and fighting thousand year old nationalist battles.
The corollary is that stub articles that never get beyond the first stages would never be included in the "stable wikipedia", and that's mostly what the anti-deletionists are arguing about.
OS X was designed in an era when 3D chips were pretty primitive, so it falls back onto the CPU if the graphics chips aren't up to snuff. If you check the system profiler, "Quartz Extreme" probably isn't enabled on your MacBook.
IIRC, MS eventually came around to the same conclusion and Win7 will emulate DX9 on the CPU for certain chipsets.
The people (if any) who are interested in those pages are the ones who will notice or care if there is spamdalism on those pages, and I'm sure many of them would be happy to fix it.
One would think, but in reality a lot of wikipedia was "completed" 2-5 years ago and isn't currently being actively edited or watched by anyone (except through automated anti-vandalism tools). The problem also isn't penis spam, but mostly POV insertion or poorly written sections that lower the overall article quality.
Maybe you are willing to accept that as just internet democracy in action, but the people running Wikipedia have a reputation to uphold and want to avoid the GeoCities scenario of hosting millions of abandoned pages full of garbage.
Are we talking about successfully giving away free web browsers, or why Netscape failed financially? Because the latter has much more to with the server software market.
Yeah, the author didn't put any research into this.
For example, about the 5200 controllers he says "Atari engineers likely wanted to try something new".
However it's already well documented on the web that the engineers thought the controllers sucked. It was marketing that demanded the controller design just so they could claim a greater feature set than the Intellevision controllers.
Combined usage of Mozilla 'seamonkey' and Netscape 6 was under 2% IIRC. Unlike Firefox, it was never a popular browser outside of Slashdot.
And correction to the above post - Netscape held around 30% marketshare until NS6. Point being they had many years of opportunity to reverse their market share slide, but instead bottomed out at the very bottom.
Well, nobody is saying that Mac users couldn't get onto the web.
The argument was that Apple themselves were more clueless about the Internet than MS or IBM. They were too busy making fun of Windows95 for finally having a trash can and didn't notice the features which were kicking their ass.
(And FWIW, IBM offered SLIP support to consumers but TCP/IP was still an extra-cost add-on for anyone with ethernet. So I wouldn't say they quite got it either.)
The other issue was that in order to make a local application sale, you needed IT buy-in for all your platform technologies and support needs. A web application is a pure business sale, and therefore much easier to get your foot in the door.
The "revisionist history" is that Microsoft's illegal activities had any real effect on Netscape. Most of this occurred in the IE3 timeframe and really didn't make any significant difference. Microsoft broke the law, but ultimately it was the better product that won.
Netscape held around 50% marketshare until they released the steaming turd called Netscape 6, and the rats finally fled the sinking ship.
> Answer this question: Would you feel the same if it was MSFT and IE?
You do realize that every browser since Netscape 1.0 has defaulted the home/search pages for revenue generation and data collection? Of course MS does the same thing with MSN/Live/Bing/whatever. Apple has even hardcoded the search provider for Safari on Macs.
The issue with "toolbars" is not so much the functionality but that they override the user's preferences. There's nothing really wrong with a well-behaved toolbar like Google's (which comes preinstalled on a lot of PCs).
Slashdot Mirror
Weren't 32-bit machines entry level before 1990? Yet, it took until MS shipped XP in 2001 before most consumers were running a 32-bit OS. We'll probably be running 64-bit Windows by 2030.
Only if Microsoft followed the advice of Slashdot posters and kludged large memory PAE support into 32-bit Windows.
4GB should be a pretty standard baseline configuration by next year, which means MS is pretty much forcing them to go 64-bit.
So, unless the program was feeding back spy info to ID, they really have no idea how many were Linux sales.
Multiplayer games authenticate against a master server. Of course, nobody really played D3 or Q4 MP, but it's a data point at least.
Yeah, in fact Loki was so far ahead of the curve, they tried to sell Quake3 for Linux before most distros had OpenGL support.
I kinda doubt it. Netbooks seem to be taking over the low-end laptop market, rather than selling exclusively to high-end gadget-o-phile consumers.
I think it's more pertinent to point out that one person has said that he didn't find it funny.
Fanboys decide, Slashdot reports
There weren't any good Star Wars books written by George Lucas, nor Star Trek books by Gene Roddenberry.
FWIW, both were credited with movie novelizations. (Good or not.)
OK, I need you to break this down for me. How does pointing out that MS's illegal activities in 1996 with Compaq and other OEMs had little to do with Netscape delivering a pile of shit browser 5 years later in 2001?
Also how much Microsoft pay me for flaming decade-old products from dead software brands?
Finally, what size tard helmet do you wear? Would you say it's bigger or smaller than your typical watermelon? Please also tell me about your drool cup.
Yeah, it indicates that MS has become so bureaucratic that the left hand (marketing) can't even get the right hand (engineering) to fix the build scripts. Hardly sounds like a kick your competitors in the ass outfit anymore.
Either that and you take MS's explaination on face value, and it means the Windows development culture has become so corrupt that ISVs are now hardcoding version numbers into their apps to extort paid upgrades out of their customers.
(Hopefully the slashbot droid who called me a shill for posting about IE3 is reading this :)
I've heard talk about this "stable version" plan for a long time. It's a great idea, as much of Wikipedia is essentially "done", but it's never been implemented.
Hrm. Perhaps the wikimooks are too busy reverting Micheal Jackson edits and fighting thousand year old nationalist battles.
The corollary is that stub articles that never get beyond the first stages would never be included in the "stable wikipedia", and that's mostly what the anti-deletionists are arguing about.
Correct. The commercial software industry has always treated version numbers as a marketing element.
It doesn't need to make sense, it just needs to look good on the box.
OS X was designed in an era when 3D chips were pretty primitive, so it falls back onto the CPU if the graphics chips aren't up to snuff. If you check the system profiler, "Quartz Extreme" probably isn't enabled on your MacBook.
IIRC, MS eventually came around to the same conclusion and Win7 will emulate DX9 on the CPU for certain chipsets.
The people (if any) who are interested in those pages are the ones who will notice or care if there is spamdalism on those pages, and I'm sure many of them would be happy to fix it.
One would think, but in reality a lot of wikipedia was "completed" 2-5 years ago and isn't currently being actively edited or watched by anyone (except through automated anti-vandalism tools). The problem also isn't penis spam, but mostly POV insertion or poorly written sections that lower the overall article quality.
Maybe you are willing to accept that as just internet democracy in action, but the people running Wikipedia have a reputation to uphold and want to avoid the GeoCities scenario of hosting millions of abandoned pages full of garbage.
yep, a slashbot, called it.
No, factually Microsoft was not "convicted" of "bundling" in the USA.
You are only making yourself look like a generic slashbot fool here, please educate yourself.
Actually, Atari changed the design because the thing occassionally caught fire -- which really causes people to complain! (in court)
I've seen some big sparks popping of that RF modulator, so I can believe it was fundementally defective.
The bundling wasn't actually illegal. (According to the US courts.) Sorry you are misinformed.
Are we talking about successfully giving away free web browsers, or why Netscape failed financially? Because the latter has much more to with the server software market.
Yeah, the author didn't put any research into this.
For example, about the 5200 controllers he says "Atari engineers likely wanted to try something new".
However it's already well documented on the web that the engineers thought the controllers sucked. It was marketing that demanded the controller design just so they could claim a greater feature set than the Intellevision controllers.
Combined usage of Mozilla 'seamonkey' and Netscape 6 was under 2% IIRC. Unlike Firefox, it was never a popular browser outside of Slashdot.
And correction to the above post - Netscape held around 30% marketshare until NS6. Point being they had many years of opportunity to reverse their market share slide, but instead bottomed out at the very bottom.
Well, nobody is saying that Mac users couldn't get onto the web.
The argument was that Apple themselves were more clueless about the Internet than MS or IBM. They were too busy making fun of Windows95 for finally having a trash can and didn't notice the features which were kicking their ass.
(And FWIW, IBM offered SLIP support to consumers but TCP/IP was still an extra-cost add-on for anyone with ethernet. So I wouldn't say they quite got it either.)
MacTCP didn't ship with MacOS. In fact it was only available as a site licence to larger customers.
If you were using MacTCP to connect to an ISP in 1995, its because you warezed it. (I know I did.)
Macs didn't come out of box with internet/web support until Mac OS 8 in 1996.
I can ditto all of that.
The other issue was that in order to make a local application sale, you needed IT buy-in for all your platform technologies and support needs. A web application is a pure business sale, and therefore much easier to get your foot in the door.
You are halfway correct.
The "revisionist history" is that Microsoft's illegal activities had any real effect on Netscape. Most of this occurred in the IE3 timeframe and really didn't make any significant difference. Microsoft broke the law, but ultimately it was the better product that won.
Netscape held around 50% marketshare until they released the steaming turd called Netscape 6, and the rats finally fled the sinking ship.
> Answer this question: Would you feel the same if it was MSFT and IE?
You do realize that every browser since Netscape 1.0 has defaulted the home/search pages for revenue generation and data collection? Of course MS does the same thing with MSN/Live/Bing/whatever. Apple has even hardcoded the search provider for Safari on Macs.
The issue with "toolbars" is not so much the functionality but that they override the user's preferences. There's nothing really wrong with a well-behaved toolbar like Google's (which comes preinstalled on a lot of PCs).
Why in the fuck would you want UnixWare when you already have open source Solaris?