About wizards.. the one wizard I would say I hate absolutely the most in WinXP got to be "Create a new connection", when you make a new network connection.. the first "page" has 4 totally vague descriptions that you have to guess, instead of just picking from a list of ethernet, ppp, wireless or something else that acctually makes sense. I don't like when they put their asumptions over my reasoning.
I would acctually say "They just made it bad enough so people didn't really look for an alternative."
Because this was the point in time when they started their anti-competetive practices, namely have Windows give the impression that competing products were inferior with bougus errors. First relevant link I found on google: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/600488.stm
Also the joint venture between IBM and MS, creating together NT/OS2 had most 3rd party ISVs porting their software to this system. In the end MS ditched this and created their own system *and* having a headstart creating software for it (Word, Execl) in addition to not spend a lot on a dead port.
OTOH the fine (now 1.5M EUR/day) would likely increase.. I think someone with the EU said that they were lenient (sp?) when it is only 1.5, that it could have been up to 5M EUR/day at this point.
Didn't know about this in practice and found it an interesting read - Thanks for the link.
What I find a bit scary is that for example AVG Free Edition (Antivirus) did scream about eicar.exe (test virus), but it does not seem to see mytestfile.txt:eicar.exe
What about when MS posted some specs on the web and you had to agree to their demands not to use the info in ?commercial? purposes w/o a license or something by clicking an Accept button? Anyone wanna bet on court results on that one?
You don't pay more for a non-provider-provided phone [...] spend the $200 extra for an unlocked phone.
Am I supposed to not see a contradiction here?
I guess the GP meant "... spend the $200 extra for an unlocked phone up front." time based contracts usually have more or less the same cost but over a longer time.
CDMA is the only one in your list which is a different standard.. GSM, GPRS, EDGE (EGPRS) are all same but with improved data transfer rates at the expense of using more channels. In addition, GSM, GPRS, EDGE and the now increasingly wider spread 3G/UMTS is what is used in Europe.
Phone+contract bundling just got legal here in Finland (unfortunatly IMO), but at least they have to stat how much more you will pay with the 24 month locked contract in comparsion to basicly the same contract but w/o the phone. Just got some adds and being locked for 24 months would save me just 35 (on a Nokia N70)- so I wouldn't go for that, I rather have a restrictionless phone.
Do you mean dumb in the same sense that Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Access, Winamp, AIM and ICQ gives away what they do? Noone knows those either?
With regards to UI (GUI), at least I find that Linux becomes more and more consistent all the tim, while the reverse seems to be true for Windows. Seems all MS Offices uses different toolkits, half of the 3rd party apps want to "differentiate themselves" and thus look different and what is worse, behaves differently (titlebar menu missing standard stuff for example).
In addition, I find it quite obnoxious to have WMP and having to patch security bugs in it on a Windows 2003 Server that is used primary as a DC and file-share. Plase name *one* reason why I would like to have WMP on a server?
I wish to disagree.. MSIL spcification was published only so that it could hold a candle against Java (being "open" and standard), when in practice.NET uses lots of Windows only libraries.
I'd say.NET is cross-platform only in MS understanding of the word - it runs on win2k, winxp etc.
I have yet to see a.NET app writen on windows that wouldn't look horrible on any other platform if able to run at all.
IANAL, but it seems from the text that he has taken out the harddisk, which is an IDE (ie. the "no firewire needed"). So, in that case, any patent they have most likely is comprised of the whole system and not a harddisk with an FS alone. In such a case, wouldn't it at least seem that any patent covering it be unlikely?
Also, I didn't see him mentioning from where he is, but in Europe at least I'd think this would fall under the "reverse-engineering for interoperation" clause and thus be totally legal.
Slashdot Mirror
About wizards.. the one wizard I would say I hate absolutely the most in WinXP got to be "Create a new connection", when you make a new network connection.. the first "page" has 4 totally vague descriptions that you have to guess, instead of just picking from a list of ethernet, ppp, wireless or something else that acctually makes sense. I don't like when they put their asumptions over my reasoning.
IE doesn't really "load fast" as it is already mostly running if explorer is (always), so it is more of a "Open new window" operation.
Something I found that might help you:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ffpreloader/
It is a preloader that you run at windows startup and that is supposed to reduce FF startup time (can't confirm as I don't use it).
Try entering:
--------------------
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.google.com:80
--------------------
No dashed lines, but an extra enter at the last line.
There - Google in all its glory for you.
I would acctually say
"They just made it bad enough so people didn't really look for an alternative."
Because this was the point in time when they started their anti-competetive practices,
namely have Windows give the impression that competing products were inferior with bougus errors.
First relevant link I found on google: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/600488.stm
Also the joint venture between IBM and MS, creating together NT/OS2 had most 3rd party ISVs porting their software to this system. In the end MS ditched this and created their own system *and* having a headstart creating software for it (Word, Execl) in addition to not spend a lot on a dead port.
Correct me if I'm wrong..
OTOH the fine (now 1.5M EUR/day) would likely increase.. I think someone with the EU said that they were lenient (sp?) when it is only 1.5, that it could have been up to 5M EUR/day at this point.
You mean like Linus Torvalds from Finland (EU) who made Linux (... started it...) ?
Back in time I was amazed that Diablo2 with network play was smoother under linux with WineX (former version/name of Cedega) than Windows 2000.
Didn't know about this in practice and found it an interesting read - Thanks for the link.
What I find a bit scary is that for example AVG Free Edition (Antivirus) did scream about eicar.exe (test virus), but it does not seem to see mytestfile.txt:eicar.exe
What about when MS posted some specs on the web and you had to agree to their demands not to use the info in ?commercial? purposes w/o a license or something by clicking an Accept button? Anyone wanna bet on court results on that one?
Something like Nokia 7710?
Sorry, it's in finnish, but at least you see the pic: http://www.nokia.fi/puhelimet/puhelinmallit/7710/
And yes, there is a proto-chip to get it to tune in TV too.
You don't pay more for a non-provider-provided phone [...] spend the $200 extra for an unlocked phone.
Am I supposed to not see a contradiction here?
I guess the GP meant "... spend the $200 extra for an unlocked phone up front."
time based contracts usually have more or less the same cost but over a longer time.
CDMA is the only one in your list which is a different standard..
f or_GSM_Evolution
GSM, GPRS, EDGE (EGPRS) are all same but with improved data transfer rates at the expense of using more channels. In addition, GSM, GPRS, EDGE and the now increasingly wider spread 3G/UMTS is what is used in Europe.
Find out more at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Data_Rates_
Phone+contract bundling just got legal here in Finland (unfortunatly IMO), but at least they have to stat how much more you will pay with the 24 month locked contract in comparsion to basicly the same contract but w/o the phone.
Just got some adds and being locked for 24 months would save me just 35 (on a Nokia N70)- so I wouldn't go for that, I rather have a restrictionless phone.
Do you mean dumb in the same sense that Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, Access, Winamp, AIM and ICQ gives away what they do? Noone knows those either?
With regards to UI (GUI), at least I find that Linux becomes more and more consistent all the tim, while the reverse seems to be true for Windows. Seems all MS Offices uses different toolkits, half of the 3rd party apps want to "differentiate themselves" and thus look different and what is worse, behaves differently (titlebar menu missing standard stuff for example).
Why do you use a KDE desktop?
:)
I use Gnome too and don't like KDE that much.. The good thing is that everyone is able to choose what pleases him/her. More power to all.
It is true though that the differences are a bit annoying from time to time. Fortunatly almost the only KDE app I use is K3b.
One reason might be that satelites can be taken out much easier than unknown airplanes, in a war situation. I suppose.
Load up okgazette and the type in location bar:
javascript:document.body.innerHTML = document.body.innerHTML;
Strips any select-sillyness, at least in firefox.
In addition, I find it quite obnoxious to have WMP and having to patch security bugs in it on a Windows 2003 Server that is used primary as a DC and file-share.
Plase name *one* reason why I would like to have WMP on a server?
None of your suggestions have a net effect - the ability to change another market. IM and WMP both have.
I guess one can ask if the bundled software pushes a fileformat or a protocoll (controlled by MS), if it is, it probably is a big no-no.
So, next thing could possibly be some kind of RSS-like-format that is "innovated" at MS (isn't something like that coming to Vista?).
Windows:
4.) Tries to promote their protocol over (even better suited) alternatives.
Check your facts, a monopoly can very well be legal.
Monopolies
Specificly:
Natural monopoly
I wish to disagree.. .NET uses lots of Windows only libraries.
.NET is cross-platform only in MS understanding of the word - it runs on win2k, winxp etc.
.NET app writen on windows that wouldn't look horrible on any other platform if able to run at all.
MSIL spcification was published only so that it could hold a candle against Java (being "open" and standard), when in practice
I'd say
I have yet to see a
IANAL, but it seems from the text that he has taken out the harddisk, which is an IDE (ie. the "no firewire needed"). So, in that case, any patent they have most likely is comprised of the whole system and not a harddisk with an FS alone. In such a case, wouldn't it at least seem that any patent covering it be unlikely?
Also, I didn't see him mentioning from where he is, but in Europe at least I'd think this would fall under the "reverse-engineering for interoperation" clause and thus be totally legal.
Seems it has allready been done.
Sure they are "freely" downloadable, and follow the usual Microsoft "cross-platform" (mis)consption - they work on winme, win2k, winxp and so on.
Now we can question, are they really free, since you already had to pay for windows.
Why would GPL stop them from doing just that now?