Find a mac and reinstall the OS on it some time. It is the epitomy of painless. It is safe by default and will not wipe out your data. It has a consistent UI.
The problem is everyone copying the widget set Apple us, without doing any of the back-end engineering to make it work. IMHO the UI fluff on the mac is the LEAST impressive aspect of OS X - the underlying layers of Quartz, Core storage, fs-events, Grand Central, etc. are all far more impressive in terms of engineering - and while the muppets putting out Fedora are focusing on killing the advantages Linux has by reducing options in the name of UI simplification and BREAKING SHIT in the process, Apple is doing more work in the back end to bring stuff about like SSD caching that solves real world problems (e.g.. "i has an ssd and a hd and but don't want to manually manage storage").
Linux devs! Stop breaking Linux to make it UI-simple. Make the back end stuff work properly.
If i want to use something that looks like a Mac, it better WORK like a Mac underneath. Something that looks like a mac but doesn't work is not going to cut it. The UI is very much a secondary reason as to why I am a Mac user today, and used to be a Linux user prior to 2006.
Unfortunately, heaps of enterprise management tools require Java (either that or CLI, but sometimes visualizing what is going on with a particular device is easier with a GUI where you have graphs, etc).
Can "figure it out" just fine. It's still garbage. Metro is still garbage. Search is still broken between the desktop and metro - and just try searching within metro for say "all document types containing jeff". You can't do it. I could do that in 7. I could do that in Vista. I'm even pretty sure that worked back in XP.
Ahahaha.... you believe that? I remember back when Win2k was new and XP coming out... a whole heap of my 1999/2000 purchased Windows 98 games would not run on anything newer. They were never updated.
Once it is shipped, most game publishers (looking at you, EA) don't give a shit about support for new platforms.
What can't you do with this method? Install warez? Seriously - i'm keen to know if there is a genuine reason why this will not work other than perhaps cost, or piracy related reasons.
$99/yr (or roughly 30c/day) to get the development software and a code-signing certificate and the functionality is yours. You're free to develop in HTML, Javascript and CSS if you don't want to pay for a certificate to sign code with.
So you mean, just like apple then? With the single exception of needing a $99 developer certificate if you want to do it yourself - which has the additional benefit of being able to optionally enforce code-signing on your machine so that you can verify that the binaries you think you're running are actually as shipped from the developer..
Serious post - I'm sure microsoft will re-port IE to other platforms if/when Windows looks like losing significant market share. The OS is becoming irrelevant, and the browser is becoming more and more important as a platform for application development.
Eventually, I'm sure they'd prefer to have a higher share of the browser market by supporting multiple platforms, than seeing the browser share shrink with Windows. With the epic failure of Windows 8, it may happen sooner than we expect.
Install IE9. If you're going to run any version of IE, IE9 is so much better than IE8 (or previous) it isn't even in the same sport, let alone the ballpark. But yes, Vista and XP users are screwed, as IE9 is not available for them.
In an article about an IE-specific exploit, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Dolphin, Iceweasel, Opera, etc are irrelevant. My car isn't vulnerable to the exploit either.
If the article title was "most browsers vulnerable to blah zero-day" then sure, mentioning non-vulnerable non-ie browsers would be relevant.
Given that they wrote both the software and designed the hardware, this smacks of insufficient testing to me. It's not like they're attempting to make somebody else's hardware work.
Slashdot Mirror
Try PC-BSD.
Actually apple write stuff that generally works.
Find a mac and reinstall the OS on it some time. It is the epitomy of painless. It is safe by default and will not wipe out your data. It has a consistent UI.
The problem is everyone copying the widget set Apple us, without doing any of the back-end engineering to make it work. IMHO the UI fluff on the mac is the LEAST impressive aspect of OS X - the underlying layers of Quartz, Core storage, fs-events, Grand Central, etc. are all far more impressive in terms of engineering - and while the muppets putting out Fedora are focusing on killing the advantages Linux has by reducing options in the name of UI simplification and BREAKING SHIT in the process, Apple is doing more work in the back end to bring stuff about like SSD caching that solves real world problems (e.g.. "i has an ssd and a hd and but don't want to manually manage storage").
Linux devs! Stop breaking Linux to make it UI-simple. Make the back end stuff work properly.
If i want to use something that looks like a Mac, it better WORK like a Mac underneath. Something that looks like a mac but doesn't work is not going to cut it. The UI is very much a secondary reason as to why I am a Mac user today, and used to be a Linux user prior to 2006.
Or, you know - he could use something that works. Be it another Linux distro, OS X or even Windows. The world is not starved for viable alternatives.
+1 to that. Having eaten both beef and horse (in Kazakhstan), I quite like horse. However, if you're buying a beef burger, it should be 100% beef.
I find it to be a decent public warning to users that "free shit" isn't free.
Unfortunately, heaps of enterprise management tools require Java (either that or CLI, but sometimes visualizing what is going on with a particular device is easier with a GUI where you have graphs, etc).
No, it is default, and you need to pay for some third party shareware app that may or may not be broken by a service pack to get rid of it.
Can "figure it out" just fine. It's still garbage. Metro is still garbage. Search is still broken between the desktop and metro - and just try searching within metro for say "all document types containing jeff". You can't do it. I could do that in 7. I could do that in Vista. I'm even pretty sure that worked back in XP.
Some of the best old-school demos only have their best sound with the GUS.
Ahahaha.... you believe that? I remember back when Win2k was new and XP coming out... a whole heap of my 1999/2000 purchased Windows 98 games would not run on anything newer. They were never updated.
Once it is shipped, most game publishers (looking at you, EA) don't give a shit about support for new platforms.
What can't you do with this method? Install warez? Seriously - i'm keen to know if there is a genuine reason why this will not work other than perhaps cost, or piracy related reasons.
Did you see the power consumption?
... that apple buy all of them for the Macbook Air?
If you were running an operating system from the last 6 years that wouldn't be the case.
$99/yr (or roughly 30c/day) to get the development software and a code-signing certificate and the functionality is yours. You're free to develop in HTML, Javascript and CSS if you don't want to pay for a certificate to sign code with.
So you mean, just like apple then? With the single exception of needing a $99 developer certificate if you want to do it yourself - which has the additional benefit of being able to optionally enforce code-signing on your machine so that you can verify that the binaries you think you're running are actually as shipped from the developer..
Serious post - I'm sure microsoft will re-port IE to other platforms if/when Windows looks like losing significant market share. The OS is becoming irrelevant, and the browser is becoming more and more important as a platform for application development.
Eventually, I'm sure they'd prefer to have a higher share of the browser market by supporting multiple platforms, than seeing the browser share shrink with Windows. With the epic failure of Windows 8, it may happen sooner than we expect.
IE is cross-platform. x86, x64, XP, Vista, Windows 7, Windows 2003, Windows 2008, etc.
They are. The malicious software removal tool is a monthly "poor mans virus scanner", not a single install.
Install IE9. If you're going to run any version of IE, IE9 is so much better than IE8 (or previous) it isn't even in the same sport, let alone the ballpark. But yes, Vista and XP users are screwed, as IE9 is not available for them.
Haven't seen much in the way of actual functionality beyond basic HTML parsing in Lynx either.
In an article about an IE-specific exploit, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Dolphin, Iceweasel, Opera, etc are irrelevant. My car isn't vulnerable to the exploit either.
If the article title was "most browsers vulnerable to blah zero-day" then sure, mentioning non-vulnerable non-ie browsers would be relevant.
... I gather Google are now going to de-list them from their index?
I'll just wget -r and link to a local copy of it.
Given that they wrote both the software and designed the hardware, this smacks of insufficient testing to me. It's not like they're attempting to make somebody else's hardware work.