The unified paging architecture is very elegant [...] its priority scheduling handles I/O properly
In different words, you're handwaving.
its priority scheduling handles I/O properly so you can actually use it (on windows, you can play a video smoothly in a player set to high priority while hashing files in the background; try the same on linux and it'll stutter like anything, because the video player's getting more than enough CPUtime but not getting priority in its hard disk accesses).
I'm sorry, but you don't understand scheduling if you think that such a factoid (even if true) would prove that one system is better designed than another.
C# was created pretty damn recently, which is pretty much the definition.
A reproduction of a baroque chair is not a "modern" chair, and an imperative, single inheritance, statically typed object oriented language is not "modern".
the great advancement in.net is to allow bidirectional interoperation between all supported languages, with a rich type system that can support classes, first-class functions, etc. (And all without many time-consuming type conversions)
That's not a "great advancement". The Symbolics Lisp machine supported that in the 1980's, and there were dozens of interoperable languages on the JVM before.NET even existed.
They put vendor specific information in !!OMG!! vendor specific fields.
The problem is that the information they put into those fields is required by Windows clients and that it was undocumented.
All of which was documented in RFC4757.
Yes, after a lot of pressure (including EU anti-trust regulators) and after having killed off their competition. What are you trying to get at?
How many billions of dollars did Microsoft cheat people out of with this little trick? How many companies did they kill with this? Why should we ever "get over" this?
If they broken Kerberos so badly, why the hell can I right my KRB5 install on Centos to point to my AD realm and have it work without any arcane settings or magic?
You can do that because Microsoft lets you and wants you to. Microsoft wants to prevent people from going the other direction, using Windows clients with UNIX servers. They do that by putting undocumented information into one of the extension fields and have Windows clients refuse to use servers that don't provide these extensions.
It's irrelevant whether one calls that "breaking Kerberos", but it definitely is anticompetitive and monopolistic.
1960's style kernels? The NT kernel is the finest and most advanced one you'll see on a desktop machine
Having a lot of features doesn't make a kernel "fine" or "advanced".
In NT 3.51 it was a true microkernel; things like graphics have since been merged back in for performance, which, while inelegant, is true to the scientific method - if experiment and theory disagree, it is the theory which is wrong.
So, what again do you think is "fine" or "advanced" about it? It's a sluggish kernel with a lot of features, most of which aren't being used.
it was written by, basically, the VMS team
Yes. You say that as if it's a good thing.
hired wholesale after the collapse of DEC.
Actually, they were hired before the collapse of DEC. Hiring away its competitors' brains is one way in which Microsoft killed their competitors.
As for 1970's languages,.net/C# needs to be applauded for finding a way to make a modern language interoperate in both directions with traditional ones
C# isn't a "modern" language and C isn't a "traditional" one. C was a phenomenon that started in the 80's and broke with tradition by throwing out pretty much everything that was known about good language design. UNIX and Windows then perpetuated this bad decision.
It is good that C# interoperates with C. But so did a lot of other languages. Modula-3, for example, did a pretty good job at it.
Apart from the fact that your figures are wrong, why are you even talking about Linux? I'm making no argument that Linux is more innovative than Windows. Linux is simply what was left after Microsoft effectively killed all its competitors. Linux has a lot of pragmatic advantages over Windows, but in terms of innovation, it is just as outdated as Windows.
but markets are a study in pragmatism
No, they are not. If they were, they'd be adopting Linux. Markets are a study in golf-playing executives being bamboozled and pressured by Microsoft salespeople.
Compared to all the other things that are delayed because of Microsoft, SSDs are not at the top of my list to worry about: the main reason we're still using 1980's style window systems, programmed in 1970's style languages, running on top of 1960's style kernels and file systems is because Microsoft perpetuated that.
If Microsoft hadn't dragged the market to the bottom of the cesspool with the bad "standards" that they set, companies would actually have been able to produce innovative operating systems and user interfaces, and market forces could have led to a gradual improvement.
More likely: Channel Intelligence isnâ(TM)t prepared to litigate against Amazon, who would likely lawyer CI into the ground over this âoepatent.â
CI most likely wants to get bought by Amazon, and then Amazon can sue everybody over this patent; the patent is quite complementary to their "one click" invention.
I don't get why people want this. Most real-world 3D perception (the kind of scenes you see in movies) derives from motion parallax, not binocular stereo. Trying to use stereo for those scenes is completely unrealistic and visually disturbing.
Also, flat images are kind of scale free, but 3D scenes are not. If you watch Jurassic Park in 3D on your television, you really do see a bunch of 8 inch toy dinosaurs fighting in a little box. Ooh, scary.
Once you start outsourcing applications and virtual servers, you get by with a fraction of the number of people you had before. IT budgets can shrink, and there are fewer jobs.
Of course, that's exactly why IT managers hate it.
The process of making lime generates CO2, but adding the lime to seawater absorbs almost twice as much CO2. The overall process is therefore 'carbon negative'.
No, it isn't. Lime is generated largely from calcium carbonate by heating. Afterwards, that will absorb only as much CO2 as it released in the first place. But the heating itself takes energy, so you actually lose overall.
But dumping large quantities of lime into the ocean has other serious chemical effects, like killing off a lot of organisms locally. Those will decompose and add yet more CO2 to the atmosphere.
Altogether, adding lime to seawater to remove CO2 from the air is a really bad idea.
Touch screens are nowhere near the accuracy of a computer mouse, and they are a pain to use with desktop computers. Also, the were already around 30 years ago, and the mouse won because it's the better pointing device.
Real coders write code that you can take a ruler from any given close brace and draw a vertical line right up to the matching open brace,
Funny... the people who invented the language aren't doing that, and neither are most coding conventions.
Lines are cheap. Time added trying to figure out an obfuscated code structure because somebody wanted to save lines (ie, put the open brace on the same line instead of doing the above) is expensive.
Maybe you should invest in better development tools than a ruler and a piece of paper.
Everybody else gets fired.
The people who should get fired are people who make a nuisance of themselves because they have stupid, unfounded ideas and try to impose them on others for no good reason. You know, people like you.
Linux has plenty of haters... like up in Redmond, and up in every Microsoft shop that feels threatened by Linux.
Seriously, though: there is no point in "hating Linux": Linux is a large collection of independently developed and maintained components. When some people hated Qt, they developed Gtk+. When some people hated Perl, the developed Ruby. When some people hated Sawfish, they developed Metacity. Etc.
That's different from Microsoft: I can hate it as much as I want to, I just can't fix it.
If that happens, people can easily tell from the log files. Based on what the British government actually said, none of that seems to have happened, which means that it comes down to changing the password.
In fact, I doubt that any of what you say was actually likely. Blackberries generally aren't used as direct IMAP clients and probably don't even have the IMAP password stored.
Most likely, the only exposure of this was likely recent E-mails and some contact information, if that, and I doubt that's big news to the Chinese. Furthermore, any really sensitive information would have to be sent as an encrypted message anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
The unified paging architecture is very elegant [...] its priority scheduling handles I/O properly
In different words, you're handwaving.
its priority scheduling handles I/O properly so you can actually use it (on windows, you can play a video smoothly in a player set to high priority while hashing files in the background; try the same on linux and it'll stutter like anything, because the video player's getting more than enough CPUtime but not getting priority in its hard disk accesses).
I'm sorry, but you don't understand scheduling if you think that such a factoid (even if true) would prove that one system is better designed than another.
C# was created pretty damn recently, which is pretty much the definition.
A reproduction of a baroque chair is not a "modern" chair, and an imperative, single inheritance, statically typed object oriented language is not "modern".
the great advancement in .net is to allow bidirectional interoperation between all supported languages, with a rich type system that can support classes, first-class functions, etc. (And all without many time-consuming type conversions)
That's not a "great advancement". The Symbolics Lisp machine supported that in the 1980's, and there were dozens of interoperable languages on the JVM before .NET even existed.
They put vendor specific information in !!OMG!! vendor specific fields.
The problem is that the information they put into those fields is required by Windows clients and that it was undocumented.
All of which was documented in RFC4757.
Yes, after a lot of pressure (including EU anti-trust regulators) and after having killed off their competition. What are you trying to get at?
How many billions of dollars did Microsoft cheat people out of with this little trick? How many companies did they kill with this? Why should we ever "get over" this?
If they broken Kerberos so badly, why the hell can I right my KRB5 install on Centos to point to my AD realm and have it work without any arcane settings or magic?
You can do that because Microsoft lets you and wants you to. Microsoft wants to prevent people from going the other direction, using Windows clients with UNIX servers. They do that by putting undocumented information into one of the extension fields and have Windows clients refuse to use servers that don't provide these extensions.
It's irrelevant whether one calls that "breaking Kerberos", but it definitely is anticompetitive and monopolistic.
1960's style kernels? The NT kernel is the finest and most advanced one you'll see on a desktop machine
Having a lot of features doesn't make a kernel "fine" or "advanced".
In NT 3.51 it was a true microkernel; things like graphics have since been merged back in for performance, which, while inelegant, is true to the scientific method - if experiment and theory disagree, it is the theory which is wrong.
So, what again do you think is "fine" or "advanced" about it? It's a sluggish kernel with a lot of features, most of which aren't being used.
it was written by, basically, the VMS team
Yes. You say that as if it's a good thing.
hired wholesale after the collapse of DEC.
Actually, they were hired before the collapse of DEC. Hiring away its competitors' brains is one way in which Microsoft killed their competitors.
As for 1970's languages, .net/C# needs to be applauded for finding a way to make a modern language interoperate in both directions with traditional ones
C# isn't a "modern" language and C isn't a "traditional" one. C was a phenomenon that started in the 80's and broke with tradition by throwing out pretty much everything that was known about good language design. UNIX and Windows then perpetuated this bad decision.
It is good that C# interoperates with C. But so did a lot of other languages. Modula-3, for example, did a pretty good job at it.
Linux has yet to break into the single digit.
Apart from the fact that your figures are wrong, why are you even talking about Linux? I'm making no argument that Linux is more innovative than Windows. Linux is simply what was left after Microsoft effectively killed all its competitors. Linux has a lot of pragmatic advantages over Windows, but in terms of innovation, it is just as outdated as Windows.
but markets are a study in pragmatism
No, they are not. If they were, they'd be adopting Linux. Markets are a study in golf-playing executives being bamboozled and pressured by Microsoft salespeople.
old does not mean bad, same as new does not mean good
I completely agree: in the 1980's, C was a bad new language.
I'm guessing you're going for a "+5 Funny" here, right?
Compared to all the other things that are delayed because of Microsoft, SSDs are not at the top of my list to worry about: the main reason we're still using 1980's style window systems, programmed in 1970's style languages, running on top of 1960's style kernels and file systems is because Microsoft perpetuated that.
If Microsoft hadn't dragged the market to the bottom of the cesspool with the bad "standards" that they set, companies would actually have been able to produce innovative operating systems and user interfaces, and market forces could have led to a gradual improvement.
Here's my suggestion: look for a simple string that occurs in GWT pages but in few other places, then Google for it. That should answer your question.
It's called "HTML" and everybody is already using it.
More likely: Channel Intelligence isnâ(TM)t prepared to litigate against Amazon, who would likely lawyer CI into the ground over this âoepatent.â
CI most likely wants to get bought by Amazon, and then Amazon can sue everybody over this patent; the patent is quite complementary to their "one click" invention.
I don't get why people want this. Most real-world 3D perception (the kind of scenes you see in movies) derives from motion parallax, not binocular stereo. Trying to use stereo for those scenes is completely unrealistic and visually disturbing.
Also, flat images are kind of scale free, but 3D scenes are not. If you watch Jurassic Park in 3D on your television, you really do see a bunch of 8 inch toy dinosaurs fighting in a little box. Ooh, scary.
Once you start outsourcing applications and virtual servers, you get by with a fraction of the number of people you had before. IT budgets can shrink, and there are fewer jobs.
Of course, that's exactly why IT managers hate it.
Move the login/password dialog to the right. See, now it's completely different.
Besides, look who's complaining...
The process of making lime generates CO2, but adding the lime to seawater absorbs almost twice as much CO2. The overall process is therefore 'carbon negative'.
No, it isn't. Lime is generated largely from calcium carbonate by heating. Afterwards, that will absorb only as much CO2 as it released in the first place. But the heating itself takes energy, so you actually lose overall.
But dumping large quantities of lime into the ocean has other serious chemical effects, like killing off a lot of organisms locally. Those will decompose and add yet more CO2 to the atmosphere.
Altogether, adding lime to seawater to remove CO2 from the air is a really bad idea.
It's like using a Perl hash table containing integers encoded as strings, when all you really wanted was "int x[10];"
Touch screens are nowhere near the accuracy of a computer mouse, and they are a pain to use with desktop computers. Also, the were already around 30 years ago, and the mouse won because it's the better pointing device.
Many corporate users live in the false sense of security that their (personal and corporate) data is secure should the laptop get stolen.
Yes, they do, but not because of this. Among the many things wrong with corporate laptop security, this is way down on the list.
(It's also not news to anybody who has ever power-cycled an Apple II.)
That might also hold true for the guy that is walking around with millions of SSNs on his laptop, including yours.
Tens of thousands of people have access to my social security number; why would I care?
aka
You should patent that encryption method! It's so convenient! I didn't even need a key!
Once you decide that users need to authenticate to access some content
And who is supposed to authenticate? Do you even understand what this service does?
This isn't about the children
The part I responded to is very much about children.
its about a mobile phone operator having an insecure website.
That's bullshit, too, but that's a separate issue.
Among the many things that can be done to a machine when someone has physical access, this isn't my primary worry.
And if you don't run encrypted swap space, don't worry about this.
Real coders write code that you can take a ruler from any given close brace and draw a vertical line right up to the matching open brace,
Funny... the people who invented the language aren't doing that, and neither are most coding conventions.
Lines are cheap. Time added trying to figure out an obfuscated code structure because somebody wanted to save lines (ie, put the open brace on the same line instead of doing the above) is expensive.
Maybe you should invest in better development tools than a ruler and a piece of paper.
Everybody else gets fired.
The people who should get fired are people who make a nuisance of themselves because they have stupid, unfounded ideas and try to impose them on others for no good reason. You know, people like you.
Linux has plenty of haters... like up in Redmond, and up in every Microsoft shop that feels threatened by Linux.
Seriously, though: there is no point in "hating Linux": Linux is a large collection of independently developed and maintained components. When some people hated Qt, they developed Gtk+. When some people hated Perl, the developed Ruby. When some people hated Sawfish, they developed Metacity. Etc.
That's different from Microsoft: I can hate it as much as I want to, I just can't fix it.
So you see, there's plenty of scope for mischief.
If that happens, people can easily tell from the log files. Based on what the British government actually said, none of that seems to have happened, which means that it comes down to changing the password.
In fact, I doubt that any of what you say was actually likely. Blackberries generally aren't used as direct IMAP clients and probably don't even have the IMAP password stored.
Most likely, the only exposure of this was likely recent E-mails and some contact information, if that, and I doubt that's big news to the Chinese. Furthermore, any really sensitive information would have to be sent as an encrypted message anyway.