What sony DID do is release a new version of the PSP slim with different video driver (2002? i think - i have one - originally could not hack it) which did break the Pandora battery + stick hack for a while.
Or appeared to - what was actually happening was that the video hardware driver didn't work with the new hardware - once the new driver was installed into the memory stick image in newer versions of the hack, it worked (mine has been successfully hacked with a newer software).
If you knew the keypresses to push without being able to see, the older hack DID work on the 2002 PSP. You just couldn't see what you were doing...
Again, I'm talking about browser security in general terms, not this specific incident. There will always be specific incidents that fall through the cracks, and IE (when properly configured), Firefox, Safari, etc are not so different in that regard.
Did I say it would help with this particular problem? No, it won't. However security problems are NOT exclusive to IE, and there is plenty you can to do mitigate issues that you can't easily do with other browsers.
Come back when you understand application security.
My GF worked in both onshore and offshore oil and gas for about a year (good pay). She noticed a few things, mentioned them to a co-worker ("isn't that bad?" type thing) and the general culture out there is that if you DO report something and make waves for the company to deal with, your reputation in the industry goes to shit (as someone who causes production problems) and you just don't end up finding another job off-shore.
This is why you put a content filtering firewall in front of it. As is a good idea to protect the average "blue E = teh intarwebs!!" luser, irrespective of browser selection.
DOS 5 (built in EMS/XMS support, upper memory use). Windows 2000 (those who weren't administering MS networks before active directory have no idea on the improvement), Windows 7.
Were those products best in class? No, but they were huge improvements that worked with your existing MS stuff, and made your life a hell of a lot easier if you were in a microsoft shop (as most corporates are).
Ditto. However I think microsoft are trapped by their own success. There is that much legacy content out there on corporate intranets, etc that they can't change rendering engines. They need to keep all the old cruft in there so that they can fall back to IE6 mode to render content generated by their own software (eg, sharepoint, etc) properly.
I'm certainly looking forward to IE9 as it means I'll have a half-decent standards compliant (or certainly better than current) browser that I can lock down with group policy, and works with the corporate intranet.
+1 to this. All our new office machines are Windows 7 64 bit with IE8 in protected mode, and sites locked down into security zones. IE 8 is a mandatory install on all the old XP boxes.
And yes, javascript performance (and web performance in IE8 in general) is pretty abysmal, but IE is already there, and installing anything else in addition to that is simply increasing your exposure, configuration and patch maintenance, etc.
No, not necessarily. If you have sharepoint (or a million other different legacy apps) in the workplace, IE is a necessity.
If you want to easily roll out configuration settings in an MS environment, you use IE.
And given the above, to maintain a sane, controlled, easy to maintain and troubleshoot environment - you roll ONE standard browser and keep that maintained. Anything else = unsupported.
If you happen to be on Windows, IE is already there anyway. Adding another browser simply means 2 sets of security settings and updates to maintain.
So, IE gets rolled out.
If you secure it properly with a content filtering firewall, security zones, and locked down secure configuration settings for the zones, IE security is bearable.
And given it is the ONLY browser that works with a lot of intranet type web-applications from the late 90s and early 00s, that is "good enough".
By which i mean that the work involved in securing the fleet of PCs and rebuilding the odd one that does end up getting broken is FAR less than the work involved in supporting a bunch of other browsers, their updates, configuration settings, etc.
I hate IE as much as the next guy, and only run it for internal intranet type sites - but as an SOE component, its what I and pretty much 95% of the rest of the corporate world has to deal with.
Or it could be gross, deliberate negligence. As anyone who has read the report on BP's actions leading up to the previous rig accident, or has worked in the resources industry can attest, there's a corporate culture in offshore oil and gas of "it will never happen".
There were many opportunities for the gulf spill to be prevented, but proper process was circumvented on numerous occasions.
Given that Oracle were pushing BTRFS, they also push linux, and they now own Sun (and thus ZFS), suing over ZFS development on Linux would kinda be shooting themselves in the foot.
I can't see how oracle being able to use ZFS on linux and then easily upgrade their customers to Solaris + ZFS as needs change would be a bad thing for them?
With the increasing prevelance of web-apps, I'd argue that Javascript performance is critical.
I've not experienced any slow scrolling problems in chrome, used it on everything from a core2 1.8 duo mac mini, an old pentium D 930 win7 box, and a variety of Core2/i5/i7 laptops...
I moved to chrome a year or more ago and never looked back. When Safari 4 came out I've started using that as well (i also have a mac and various idevices too, which is nice to sync with, and i'm a sucker for the full page preview coverflow history).
Firefox's UI just doesn't seem as snappy and responsive as Chrome, which i have not yet had crash on me, ever - even since v1.0 or earlier.
The only time i ever use firefox any more is when i'm using Linux and haven't been bothered to install anything else (browsing is not typically what is spend the majority of my linux OS time doing).
Be that as it may, an os is useless without software. For the task you describe, windows is the correct tool for the job.
I don't go trying to run my firewall on Windows, and i wouldn't try to deal with a (probably) slightly quirky game map development tool on an unsupported platform.
Slashdot Mirror
What sony DID do is release a new version of the PSP slim with different video driver (2002? i think - i have one - originally could not hack it) which did break the Pandora battery + stick hack for a while.
Or appeared to - what was actually happening was that the video hardware driver didn't work with the new hardware - once the new driver was installed into the memory stick image in newer versions of the hack, it worked (mine has been successfully hacked with a newer software).
If you knew the keypresses to push without being able to see, the older hack DID work on the 2002 PSP. You just couldn't see what you were doing...
Plus... ie is already installed. Installing a second browser means you have TWO potential vectors for intrustion to secure and maintain...
Again, I'm talking about browser security in general terms, not this specific incident. There will always be specific incidents that fall through the cracks, and IE (when properly configured), Firefox, Safari, etc are not so different in that regard.
Going for shiny instead of fixing bugs? Have the KDE4 team been taking notes or something?
Did I say it would help with this particular problem? No, it won't. However security problems are NOT exclusive to IE, and there is plenty you can to do mitigate issues that you can't easily do with other browsers.
Come back when you understand application security.
My GF worked in both onshore and offshore oil and gas for about a year (good pay). She noticed a few things, mentioned them to a co-worker ("isn't that bad?" type thing) and the general culture out there is that if you DO report something and make waves for the company to deal with, your reputation in the industry goes to shit (as someone who causes production problems) and you just don't end up finding another job off-shore.
This wasn't BP, it was a sub-contractor...
This is why you put a content filtering firewall in front of it. As is a good idea to protect the average "blue E = teh intarwebs!!" luser, irrespective of browser selection.
Or, if you have more than about 5 PCs on the network, you should install WSUS and control it from there.
DOS 5 (built in EMS/XMS support, upper memory use). Windows 2000 (those who weren't administering MS networks before active directory have no idea on the improvement), Windows 7.
Were those products best in class? No, but they were huge improvements that worked with your existing MS stuff, and made your life a hell of a lot easier if you were in a microsoft shop (as most corporates are).
Ditto. However I think microsoft are trapped by their own success. There is that much legacy content out there on corporate intranets, etc that they can't change rendering engines. They need to keep all the old cruft in there so that they can fall back to IE6 mode to render content generated by their own software (eg, sharepoint, etc) properly.
I'm certainly looking forward to IE9 as it means I'll have a half-decent standards compliant (or certainly better than current) browser that I can lock down with group policy, and works with the corporate intranet.
+1 to this. All our new office machines are Windows 7 64 bit with IE8 in protected mode, and sites locked down into security zones. IE 8 is a mandatory install on all the old XP boxes.
And yes, javascript performance (and web performance in IE8 in general) is pretty abysmal, but IE is already there, and installing anything else in addition to that is simply increasing your exposure, configuration and patch maintenance, etc.
No, not necessarily. If you have sharepoint (or a million other different legacy apps) in the workplace, IE is a necessity.
If you want to easily roll out configuration settings in an MS environment, you use IE.
And given the above, to maintain a sane, controlled, easy to maintain and troubleshoot environment - you roll ONE standard browser and keep that maintained. Anything else = unsupported.
If you happen to be on Windows, IE is already there anyway. Adding another browser simply means 2 sets of security settings and updates to maintain.
So, IE gets rolled out.
If you secure it properly with a content filtering firewall, security zones, and locked down secure configuration settings for the zones, IE security is bearable.
And given it is the ONLY browser that works with a lot of intranet type web-applications from the late 90s and early 00s, that is "good enough".
By which i mean that the work involved in securing the fleet of PCs and rebuilding the odd one that does end up getting broken is FAR less than the work involved in supporting a bunch of other browsers, their updates, configuration settings, etc.
I hate IE as much as the next guy, and only run it for internal intranet type sites - but as an SOE component, its what I and pretty much 95% of the rest of the corporate world has to deal with.
Or it could be gross, deliberate negligence. As anyone who has read the report on BP's actions leading up to the previous rig accident, or has worked in the resources industry can attest, there's a corporate culture in offshore oil and gas of "it will never happen".
There were many opportunities for the gulf spill to be prevented, but proper process was circumvented on numerous occasions.
That will surely result in cheaper access for everyone!
Given that Oracle were pushing BTRFS, they also push linux, and they now own Sun (and thus ZFS), suing over ZFS development on Linux would kinda be shooting themselves in the foot.
I can't see how oracle being able to use ZFS on linux and then easily upgrade their customers to Solaris + ZFS as needs change would be a bad thing for them?
... because they don't have the budget to spend on superfluous crap that is unrelated to the gameplay.
I view this as SuSE seeing the critical nature of the patch and including it irrespective of what Linus or the other kernel team guys think.
That this was not included after submission was a fairly serious error.
So, only 6 years late then? SuSE just went way up in my book.
... arstechnica misunderstands the term "up to", and confuses it with "mean".
... is chris blizzard a KDE 4 dev by any chance??
With the increasing prevelance of web-apps, I'd argue that Javascript performance is critical.
I've not experienced any slow scrolling problems in chrome, used it on everything from a core2 1.8 duo mac mini, an old pentium D 930 win7 box, and a variety of Core2/i5/i7 laptops...
I moved to chrome a year or more ago and never looked back. When Safari 4 came out I've started using that as well (i also have a mac and various idevices too, which is nice to sync with, and i'm a sucker for the full page preview coverflow history).
Firefox's UI just doesn't seem as snappy and responsive as Chrome, which i have not yet had crash on me, ever - even since v1.0 or earlier.
The only time i ever use firefox any more is when i'm using Linux and haven't been bothered to install anything else (browsing is not typically what is spend the majority of my linux OS time doing).
Exactly. Apple have a pretty good track record when it comes to releasing things. Zeroconf, OpenCL, CLANG, grand central, etc.
A LIFO stack? Hmmm messy.
Be that as it may, an os is useless without software. For the task you describe, windows is the correct tool for the job.
I don't go trying to run my firewall on Windows, and i wouldn't try to deal with a (probably) slightly quirky game map development tool on an unsupported platform.