All movies are designed visually, with any attention to science as an afterthought. Star Wars was designed for kids, so it's all kid-friendly droids, easy to recognize black / white stuff. It was also designed as a one-off movie because he only got funding for one movie. That's why Episode 4 (a tag added in a later edition) was the only one of the 6 which has a beginning and end, rather than a set up for the next movie. Only after it took off did the funding come in for the other 2. Episode 5 was in large part a set up for episode 6 since they knew they were doing it.
There are plenty of mistakes caused by the prequels, they contradict some history written as a brief throwaway line in the original movies. Everything written for episode 4 set the boundaries for what would come after, from characters, outfits, ships, political / social settings etc. Episode 4 was written as a visual matinée for kids, with lots of effects, shooting, sword duels, saving the princes etc. It wasn't written with any forethought. The designs they could bring to the screen then was limited too in terms of costumes to get actors into, sets for them to act on as well as post production effects. The design process for everything was focused around the fact that it had to be practical to shoot and look good on film, without being too scary for the kids.
In some cases the expanded universe does provide "extra explanations" on some mistakes in the movies, but they are just that, explanations you can use to fill the gap, it does not change the fact that something they put in the movie does not make sense. They are mistake patches, not removers.
It does not help that George Lucas seems to have spent his entire career rehashing the SW franchise every couple of years and releasing yet another new remaster, so you can't just mention which episode 4 you mean but the exact edition. I gave up on this a long time ago, the sooner SW fans boycott new remasters the sooner Lucas will give up trying to milk them. I don't care if Han shot first, I don't care if Hayden Christiansen appeared at Vader's funeral pire as a ghost, the first remaster with everything cleaned up and digitized was fine, leave it alone from then on in.
I reckon time is exactly what they deserve, I'm sure we could make room next door to Mahdof. Perhaps they will discover the alternate meaning of ATM first hand while there, as taught by the ever present Big Bubba and colleagues.
Oh, wait....you meant time to fix the problem. My bad;)
Actually ATM (Ass To Mouth) kinda sums up the capitalist system quite well; you have to be fucked in the ass by the corporations to earn money to put food in your mouth. Only the few at the top do the actual fucking. Perhaps naming the machine that you rely on to give you your reward for being an obedient gimp an ATM is another way of giving them a chuckle. Who cares if the ATM's are hacked? The rules they paid their politicians to introduce will ensure the little guy always pays, and the rich never use ATM's. Even when they're working fine, many ATM's charge you for access to YOUR money. You already took a shot in the ass to earn it in the first place.
In the UK. the banking industry pulled a fast one with chip & pin (something I refuse to use), is it any wonder they pull this shit?
This "focusing revenues" sounds a lot like an equation which didn't work out well for Phorm.
On one had is the money they "could" make by introducing it by adverts, on the other is the potential number of existing customers who will jump to another ISP added to the number of potential customers not even looking at BT as an option when switching from their ISP. Their current subscribers direct debits are guaranteed income with most subscribers not bothering to look around. Not to mention dealing with Phorm gives you the badge of a pariah.
They could be right, in that it's more profitable to drop Phorm. That said, I'm not sure they dropped it permanently. They seem to have bought into the DPI advert injection model, so no doubt they will only put it into the "let's get back to that after the broohaha has calmed down" box before being reintroduced a couple of years from now under a different name with lessons learned about "how not to get caught". They may still face further legal / political fallout over what they've done to date with Phorm, so dropping Phorm may help mitigate any sanctions.
For those who are currently with BT and have reconsidered moving away after this announcement I say "watch this space, BT have proven themselves perfectly willing to fuck their customers over once, they will do it again". BT think they have done no wrong. They can't be trusted. They avoided police action in the UK, they may yet avoid other punishment, but consumers CAN punish them.
If these guy's had use the Imperial handbook, they wouldn't be in this situation.
"The Emperor is most displeased with your apparent lack of effort" - Vader "He asks the impossible, we need more men, we need more time" - Commander "Then perhaps you can tell him yourself when he arrives" - Vader "The Emperor is coming here?" - Commander "That is correct Commander" - Vader "We shall redouble our efforts" - Commander "I hope so Commander for your sake, the Emperor is not as forgiving as I am" - Vader
Flesh space is a problem on all platforms, you're right. If you can get a user to click on something they will fall for it. In this case it's adverts which look real, and divert the user to a malicious website. You don't need to have any specific OS to see that advert and click on it, but you do need to have Windows to let it infect you.
Linux does have good user / admin separation so malicious stuff run as a user won't be allowed to execute admin functions, which does limit it's potential for harm. That won't stand in the way of tricking someone to enter their admin password when the box suddenly appears on their screen. End user education is key on all platforms to avoid the basic social engineering mistakes.
Admittedly it's very rare but Macs are not totally immune.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8096822.stm
The answer for this is for both Mac and Linux users to unite behind open standards in protocols and formats, and in Apple's case, demand Apple install them on their stuff. Anytime a user (on any OS) has to install a plugin to see a piece of content on a website, they are potentially vulnerable to installing a fake or infected player. If players are pre-installed, the content shows with no need to install. There'd need to be a no-autostart option on people's browsers too, to prevent unwanted code running.
Of course Microsoft and Apple, along with others like Adobe like using their own formats and protocols to help lock users in so they're not helping their own customers cause.
It is time for users of all platforms to start demanding open standards, which benefit all of us, give us all choice and free us from being locked to any one vendor. Many *nix people have been calling for it for years, it's time that voice was strengthened.
In that hypothetical situation I'd agree that malware writers would all suddenly focus their efforts towards Apple and Linux, but the success rate would be limited. Both are built to be secure.
Apple have a small number of setups that a malware writer can rely being there to target, Apple also like to keep any security (and anything else for that matter) issues secret until they have a fix, so there's potential for exploitation there. Many of their users are also of the mindset that they are different from "PC"'s even thought they run a PC too, that malware is a Windows problem, so they won't do anything to protect themselves from it.
Linux is by far a small and very fast moving target to hit. Each Linux distro has a different choice of software installed by default, slightly modified versions of software in their repositories and an army of people looking over the code before it reaches the end user. I see the most likely source of malware on Linux (when it starts) will be in closed source plugins for apps like Firefox. Flash Player has proven a weak point before, on all platforms.
Eventually, both Linux and OSX will start to see malware, but it won't be anywhere near as bad as Windows is. Windows is a once-in-a-lifetime fuck-up that others have seen and nobody has been stupid enough to emulate.
Look at the variety of OS's doing the rounds, they're ALL based on *nix. Whether it's a fully free and open source path, or a proprietary code bolted on. EVERY current OS in existence apart from Windows is *nix based to some degree, and which has 100% of the market share it really don't want? Windows. That tells it's own story. Feel free to convince yourself that things would be different and that Windows is no worse, or no more vulnerable than others. Repeat it enough and you might start believing it; it still won't make it any more true.
"Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in."
You forgot greedy corporations, they arguably do more damage than the rest put together since they have the power, influence and money to really fuck it up for us mere mortals.
Thank you for agreeing with me that this story is another Windows exclusive. The marketshare argument is bogus but it will attract more people to try and exploit Linux and Apple as their share grows. How successful they'll be is a different story.
That is in the future though, right now, the story is about Windows, without the mention that it's a Windows exclusive issue. Yet again it's misrepresented as a PC issue, implying that you're vulnerable regardless of the OS you run, which is false.
If the "targets being worthwhile" argument held, then Apple would be rich pickings. Apple users pay premium prices for their goods as they perceive them to be worth the money. They believe their products are immune from malware so won't run any anti-malware protection on their PCs. Apple have a set of default applications they include in OSX, so malware writers have a solid, stable and (supposedly) an unprotected target to aim for. Not only that, but it could be argued that since Apple users can pay premium prices, they are in a better position to be hit with ransomware. Yet, this is not happening, why not?
When stories like this start doing OS detection and giving users code designed to exploit their OS, it's then a PC issue. When it only affects Windows, it's a Windows issue. It'd be nice if we had some proper journalists who are willing to stand up to Micrsofts bullies and tell the truth.
"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis."
Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's? I'm guessing it's the good old Windows.exe and.dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.
Why is it that areas where Microsoft want to portray a large market share (either exaggerated by reports from shills or real) they have the words Microsoft and Windows all over the stories, yet when it's something they have an almost 100% market share on (malware compatibility and vulnerability), there's no mention of either Microsoft or Windows; it's all just PCs.
FAO the Microsoft Astroturfers, it was a rhetorical question but feel free to do your job and mod me down for pointing out the obvious. Wait, Ziff Davis does ring a familiar bell, hmmmmm.
I don't question whether ZFS was (or is) unsuitable either technically or legally for them to use. They have changed their minds which is also not an issue. I question the rewriting of history in deleting every reference to it, as though it never existed. Whatever Apple choose to use instead of ZFS will be (on their forums at least) seen as plan A, when ZFS was the real plan A. I don't understand the insanity which insists on rewriting history to show some unrealistic "we get plan A perfect every time" approach. Nothing works like that.
There is no reason for Apple to rewrite history when they can simply say "we have dropped ZFS for reasons we can't divulge, we are working on something else which we will announce in due course."
I know the APT (Apple Perception Team) are busy today modding any criticism as trolling, so feel free to mod this down like my other comment, rather than trying to explain why revisionism is a positive thing. I'd love to hear what Apple lose by leaving the ZFS stuff up.
Whodathunkit? A story about Apple's control freakery in rewriting history, and a comment questioning the sanity of it gets modded as Troll, I'd be living in an imaginary world if I thought Apple's image control team wouldn't mod it down. Kinda enhances the point though.
Then delay it, mark it as a target for the next release after this one. Review it closer the time to see if it is technically ready, if not, repeat the delay process.
If something they were planning on including changes somehow not to Apples liking, why do the control freakery thing of removing all past references to it in a vain attempt to rewrite history 1984 style? Is it not enough to just say "well, we've decided not to use it anymore, we have other plans we can't discuss yet."
People change their minds, even the almighty Steve Jobs won't get everything right (as it finally gets released) first run out. Think about the image they're trying to sell us on here, and imagine it in other contexts to see how believable it is.
A band writing and recording a song: able to play the whole thing, from start to finish, building riffs, fills, solo etc in one take. Vocals, harmonies etc all done with no practice, all in one take. Instant magic? No, it's shit. ALL bands spend ages refining stuff, getting stuff to work, playing with a riff, altering it slightly, trying variations etc to find a blend that works.
A writer sitting down to write a novel, and creating a masterpiece on the first draft. Any writer will tell you the first draft is ALWAYS very rough and will often only bear a small similarity to the final work.
By trying to rewrite history to remove all references that they were planning to use ZFS in some way and now won't is like trying to fool the world into thinking what they use instead was plan A, when it wasn't. Are Apple really this petty and small minded? Are they really so desperate to control their image of "perfection on every try"? Do they have any idea how these stunts just make them look like asshats?
I'm really not trying to flame here, but we ALL know that end products come from a LOT of ideas, some work, some don't, some work in theory until some other requirement kicks in and makes that part not work. This is a long process of trial and error, this is very natural; it happens on EVERY project, from EVERYONE ELSE, except apparently Apple.
In this case IT people will remember this latest purge of anything the Apple hierarchy have decided never happened as it is, and not IT people have no clue what a file system is, or that ZFS is one of them.
It's not as if it's an open source project where a vocal minority of IT skilled people can fork OSX and implement ZFS if Apple don't. What's the worst that can happen? Some will be disappointed until they see what Apple have up their sleeves as an alternate to ZFS which they may or may not know themselves yet. Will they abandon Apple? Not likely, Apple people tend to be very loyal and will continue to throw money at Apple for stuff. They will already have spent a fortune buying vendor locked Apple stuff, so switching to Windows or Linux will be harder. In all likelihood they wouldn't touch Windows with a barge pole as it's what sets them apart from regular PC users, and they won't have heard of Linux. So what have Apple got to lose by leaving the decision / thought processes as they happened?
Numbers are only part of it, the more important part is how many are critical allowing remote users to execute code on your local machine. On the bright side, they are at least patching them. Of course the stopping of further patching is part of the carrot to force people to open their wallets and fork out more cash to Microsoft for the latest Windows, which of course won't work on their hardware, which means buying a new PC with a new Windows license, and potentially a whole new round of updated versions of software which won't work with the latest Windows.
Ain't it great how Microsoft look after their license holders? It just makes you feel all warm and fuzzy.
This seems like Microsoft are running scared, that they don't understand how to continue robbing people blind in this economy.
1 - Vista bombed. 2 - Netbooks arrived so they had to take a huge profit hit per Windows license to keep Linux out. 3 - The economy went into recession so many of their customers are struggling to survive and expensive Microsoft upgrades which give very little ROI are not high on the agenda. 4 - Almost every department of Microsoft either loses money, barely breaks even or is facing being closed. 5 - Every new market Microsoft try to buy / bully their way into, the users don't want what Microsoft offer them. 6 - Both Microsoft's flagship earners are under threat, meaning everything else has a tightened budget. 7 - Microsoft's profits were down 32% last quarter (I think) with no realistic (from anyone other than the astroturfers) of it getting better anytime soon. 8 - The public have turned hostile towards greedy, rich CEOs / corporations who abuse the public for their own aims.
Given all these pressures is it any wonder that Microsoft want to try this tactic? They habitually lie, cheat, bully, bribe to get their way, why leave blackmail off the list? Either your policy is something we can live with or we move (more) US jobs overseas and leave you with a higher unemployment figure to deal with.
First, I think it's Ballmers usual used-car-salesman routine of bluffing to get his way rather than something Microsoft would actually carry out but then, they have been laying off a LOT of people in staggered announcements presumably so it don't sound that bad in the media. Or perhaps the rules for telling the stock exchange dictate the staggering of layoffs. Who knows, maybe Microsoft are paving the way for a full scale abandonment of the US. Maybe they've found a country more corruptible to set up base.
Second, if they did move out of the US at this time, I believe it would backfire big time on them. They'd be painted as unpatriotic, greedy bastards who bailed on the US as a major employer who wouldn't help play their part in rebuilding the US economy when it's struggling. Ordinary Americans would be hostile towards them, companies wouldn't want to be seen to be associated with them, so a program to switch everything away from Microsoft products would be in play in many corporations. Governments would be pressured to do the same.
This is why I believe Microsoft would never leave the US, certainly not when the economy is in the state it is and people are struggling financially. When times are better and the recession is over, people have money to spend on Microsoft products again, so it's not a good time to alienate them then either.
In short, it's the usual elite bluff to try and make the politicians blink and change policy. My response would be a full IRS tax inspection for the Microsoft board members personally, and Microsoft as a corporation since they seem to think THEY are in charge. Any money transferred overseas into a tax haven is seen as tax evasion and punished accordingly.
It is a feature, but that's like saying UK MPs have an expenses system that let's them rob from the UK taxpayer. They did nothing wrong......technically, because the loophole existed, they could. That's went down so well with UK voters as the media has shown.
That's my understanding as well. If the Palm Pre was designed aesthetically to be a clone of an Apple product with an Apple logo, then they'd have a cut and dried trademark case. Nobody is going to confuse a Palm product with an Apple one, Apple have a LOT of PR in selling people on it's brand image and love them or hate them it's products are iconic in their design.
Then again, in a society where people seem to need warnings that "this coffee may be hot", never underestimate the determination of a complete imbecile to have the ability to spend money on something. Every village has it's idiots and some of them know where the shops are.
Like any organization and it's swamp of lawyers, their job will be to find any possible loophole, regardless of whether it applies ethically and try to convince a judge that it applies in this case.
Say what???? Firefox users install addons they want via the addon manager in Firefox itself. They don't expect third parties to use other tricks to install addons, and grey out the "uninstall" option. They specially don't expect third parties from competing products which are losing market share to do this. This is NOT a misunderstanding on behalf of Firefox users.
Microsoft have nothing but contempt for those people who choose not to use Microsoft products. How many more examples do you need to see to understand that Microsoft can't stand ANY competition. They want ALL of the market, not just a share of it.
My guess is that you fall into one of the following categories:
1 - Someone with their heads in the sand, intentionally finding other ways to look when decades of evidence is staring you in the face. A worried Microsoft shareholder perhaps? 2 - A Microsoft astroturfer trying to earn a living by defending Microsoft and passing the blame in vintage Microsoft fashion.....yes, you guessed it, it's them dumbass users again. Of course they're dumbasses, they don't use Microsoft products, right? If they don't use Microsoft products they deserve to be fucked with. 3 - A comedian who makes jokes which can be read as serious. 4 - A troll looking for responses.
From what I understand of the functionality of this plugin, it helps display sites done with Microsoft drugs like.net which is fine as it stands. If Microsoft were genuine about playing well with others, they could easily have done what everyone else does and have it on the addons section of Mozilla's site along with all the other addons. They could have a banner available for.net developers to put on their site saying "This.net addon will improve your.net experience in Firefox, click here to install".
The price of new games is often a factor in people looking to get the same game cheaper. Gamers ain't stupid, they know that even the hottest tile today will probably be gathering dust on the shelf next week because they've completed it. They also know that trading it in is like a new car; drive off the lot and the value drops like a stone. They know that if they buy used, it's cheaper to start with, and the loss on trade in won't be so big. All for the same gaming experience.
I'm not surprised publishers want even more of the pie. When the recession hits your ability to justify HUGE bonuses, you have to look for other ways to squeeze your customers nuts. Look for the loopholes your customers are using to get your product without paying your rates, and seek to close them. Make people feel guilty for the poor CEO who can only afford 5 luxury yachts this year, then send the lobbyists into government to close this nasty legal loophole of your customers stealing from your table.
Companies demanding a cut of the deal on second hand goods is out of order to me, they make their profits on the first sale. Whatever happens after that is no business of theirs. There are all sorts of examples where this principle could turn into a joke, cars are one that have been pointed out.
He turned it into malware and attacked your computer? Wow, you must be speshul.
Meanwhile back at reality, he overstepped his boundaries and modified ABP to exempt his sites from the blocklist so adverts would show, a furore erupted and he released an update removing that change and apologized. Unless there's some other story you could point to and give us links for, this does NOT constitute either "malware" and it does NOT "attack anyones computer".
If you're looking for alternatives, first I'd suggest you look up some definitions for malware, it seems to be a word you don't understand and therefor could easily fall victim to in your search for purity. Good luck on that, meanwhile most of us grown ups will stick to NoScript and ABP.
Slashdot Mirror
All movies are designed visually, with any attention to science as an afterthought. Star Wars was designed for kids, so it's all kid-friendly droids, easy to recognize black / white stuff. It was also designed as a one-off movie because he only got funding for one movie. That's why Episode 4 (a tag added in a later edition) was the only one of the 6 which has a beginning and end, rather than a set up for the next movie. Only after it took off did the funding come in for the other 2. Episode 5 was in large part a set up for episode 6 since they knew they were doing it.
There are plenty of mistakes caused by the prequels, they contradict some history written as a brief throwaway line in the original movies. Everything written for episode 4 set the boundaries for what would come after, from characters, outfits, ships, political / social settings etc. Episode 4 was written as a visual matinée for kids, with lots of effects, shooting, sword duels, saving the princes etc. It wasn't written with any forethought. The designs they could bring to the screen then was limited too in terms of costumes to get actors into, sets for them to act on as well as post production effects. The design process for everything was focused around the fact that it had to be practical to shoot and look good on film, without being too scary for the kids.
In some cases the expanded universe does provide "extra explanations" on some mistakes in the movies, but they are just that, explanations you can use to fill the gap, it does not change the fact that something they put in the movie does not make sense. They are mistake patches, not removers.
It does not help that George Lucas seems to have spent his entire career rehashing the SW franchise every couple of years and releasing yet another new remaster, so you can't just mention which episode 4 you mean but the exact edition. I gave up on this a long time ago, the sooner SW fans boycott new remasters the sooner Lucas will give up trying to milk them. I don't care if Han shot first, I don't care if Hayden Christiansen appeared at Vader's funeral pire as a ghost, the first remaster with everything cleaned up and digitized was fine, leave it alone from then on in.
I reckon time is exactly what they deserve, I'm sure we could make room next door to Mahdof. Perhaps they will discover the alternate meaning of ATM first hand while there, as taught by the ever present Big Bubba and colleagues.
;)
Oh, wait....you meant time to fix the problem. My bad
Actually ATM (Ass To Mouth) kinda sums up the capitalist system quite well; you have to be fucked in the ass by the corporations to earn money to put food in your mouth. Only the few at the top do the actual fucking. Perhaps naming the machine that you rely on to give you your reward for being an obedient gimp an ATM is another way of giving them a chuckle. Who cares if the ATM's are hacked? The rules they paid their politicians to introduce will ensure the little guy always pays, and the rich never use ATM's. Even when they're working fine, many ATM's charge you for access to YOUR money. You already took a shot in the ass to earn it in the first place.
In the UK. the banking industry pulled a fast one with chip & pin (something I refuse to use), is it any wonder they pull this shit?
This "focusing revenues" sounds a lot like an equation which didn't work out well for Phorm.
On one had is the money they "could" make by introducing it by adverts, on the other is the potential number of existing customers who will jump to another ISP added to the number of potential customers not even looking at BT as an option when switching from their ISP. Their current subscribers direct debits are guaranteed income with most subscribers not bothering to look around. Not to mention dealing with Phorm gives you the badge of a pariah.
They could be right, in that it's more profitable to drop Phorm. That said, I'm not sure they dropped it permanently. They seem to have bought into the DPI advert injection model, so no doubt they will only put it into the "let's get back to that after the broohaha has calmed down" box before being reintroduced a couple of years from now under a different name with lessons learned about "how not to get caught". They may still face further legal / political fallout over what they've done to date with Phorm, so dropping Phorm may help mitigate any sanctions.
For those who are currently with BT and have reconsidered moving away after this announcement I say "watch this space, BT have proven themselves perfectly willing to fuck their customers over once, they will do it again". BT think they have done no wrong. They can't be trusted. They avoided police action in the UK, they may yet avoid other punishment, but consumers CAN punish them.
If these guy's had use the Imperial handbook, they wouldn't be in this situation.
"The Emperor is most displeased with your apparent lack of effort" - Vader
"He asks the impossible, we need more men, we need more time" - Commander
"Then perhaps you can tell him yourself when he arrives" - Vader
"The Emperor is coming here?" - Commander
"That is correct Commander" - Vader
"We shall redouble our efforts" - Commander
"I hope so Commander for your sake, the Emperor is not as forgiving as I am" - Vader
Flesh space is a problem on all platforms, you're right. If you can get a user to click on something they will fall for it. In this case it's adverts which look real, and divert the user to a malicious website. You don't need to have any specific OS to see that advert and click on it, but you do need to have Windows to let it infect you.
Linux does have good user / admin separation so malicious stuff run as a user won't be allowed to execute admin functions, which does limit it's potential for harm. That won't stand in the way of tricking someone to enter their admin password when the box suddenly appears on their screen. End user education is key on all platforms to avoid the basic social engineering mistakes.
Admittedly it's very rare but Macs are not totally immune.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8096822.stm
The answer for this is for both Mac and Linux users to unite behind open standards in protocols and formats, and in Apple's case, demand Apple install them on their stuff. Anytime a user (on any OS) has to install a plugin to see a piece of content on a website, they are potentially vulnerable to installing a fake or infected player. If players are pre-installed, the content shows with no need to install. There'd need to be a no-autostart option on people's browsers too, to prevent unwanted code running.
Of course Microsoft and Apple, along with others like Adobe like using their own formats and protocols to help lock users in so they're not helping their own customers cause.
It is time for users of all platforms to start demanding open standards, which benefit all of us, give us all choice and free us from being locked to any one vendor. Many *nix people have been calling for it for years, it's time that voice was strengthened.
In that hypothetical situation I'd agree that malware writers would all suddenly focus their efforts towards Apple and Linux, but the success rate would be limited. Both are built to be secure.
Apple have a small number of setups that a malware writer can rely being there to target, Apple also like to keep any security (and anything else for that matter) issues secret until they have a fix, so there's potential for exploitation there. Many of their users are also of the mindset that they are different from "PC"'s even thought they run a PC too, that malware is a Windows problem, so they won't do anything to protect themselves from it.
Linux is by far a small and very fast moving target to hit. Each Linux distro has a different choice of software installed by default, slightly modified versions of software in their repositories and an army of people looking over the code before it reaches the end user. I see the most likely source of malware on Linux (when it starts) will be in closed source plugins for apps like Firefox. Flash Player has proven a weak point before, on all platforms.
Eventually, both Linux and OSX will start to see malware, but it won't be anywhere near as bad as Windows is. Windows is a once-in-a-lifetime fuck-up that others have seen and nobody has been stupid enough to emulate.
Look at the variety of OS's doing the rounds, they're ALL based on *nix. Whether it's a fully free and open source path, or a proprietary code bolted on. EVERY current OS in existence apart from Windows is *nix based to some degree, and which has 100% of the market share it really don't want? Windows. That tells it's own story. Feel free to convince yourself that things would be different and that Windows is no worse, or no more vulnerable than others. Repeat it enough and you might start believing it; it still won't make it any more true.
"Every liar, cheat, grifter is taking their shot at fucking up the sandbox we all play in."
You forgot greedy corporations, they arguably do more damage than the rest put together since they have the power, influence and money to really fuck it up for us mere mortals.
"if it's actually designed to run on Linux."
Thank you for agreeing with me that this story is another Windows exclusive. The marketshare argument is bogus but it will attract more people to try and exploit Linux and Apple as their share grows. How successful they'll be is a different story.
That is in the future though, right now, the story is about Windows, without the mention that it's a Windows exclusive issue. Yet again it's misrepresented as a PC issue, implying that you're vulnerable regardless of the OS you run, which is false.
If the "targets being worthwhile" argument held, then Apple would be rich pickings. Apple users pay premium prices for their goods as they perceive them to be worth the money. They believe their products are immune from malware so won't run any anti-malware protection on their PCs. Apple have a set of default applications they include in OSX, so malware writers have a solid, stable and (supposedly) an unprotected target to aim for. Not only that, but it could be argued that since Apple users can pay premium prices, they are in a better position to be hit with ransomware. Yet, this is not happening, why not?
When stories like this start doing OS detection and giving users code designed to exploit their OS, it's then a PC issue. When it only affects Windows, it's a Windows issue. It'd be nice if we had some proper journalists who are willing to stand up to Micrsofts bullies and tell the truth.
"direct users to a Web site where harmful programs would be downloaded to their computers, says Stephen Wellman, director of community and content for Ziff Davis."
.exe and .dll again, an exclusive Windows issue disguised as a "PC" issue.
Do these affect Linux or Apple PC's? I'm guessing it's the good old Windows
Why is it that areas where Microsoft want to portray a large market share (either exaggerated by reports from shills or real) they have the words Microsoft and Windows all over the stories, yet when it's something they have an almost 100% market share on (malware compatibility and vulnerability), there's no mention of either Microsoft or Windows; it's all just PCs.
FAO the Microsoft Astroturfers, it was a rhetorical question but feel free to do your job and mod me down for pointing out the obvious. Wait, Ziff Davis does ring a familiar bell, hmmmmm.
I don't question whether ZFS was (or is) unsuitable either technically or legally for them to use. They have changed their minds which is also not an issue. I question the rewriting of history in deleting every reference to it, as though it never existed. Whatever Apple choose to use instead of ZFS will be (on their forums at least) seen as plan A, when ZFS was the real plan A. I don't understand the insanity which insists on rewriting history to show some unrealistic "we get plan A perfect every time" approach. Nothing works like that.
There is no reason for Apple to rewrite history when they can simply say "we have dropped ZFS for reasons we can't divulge, we are working on something else which we will announce in due course."
I know the APT (Apple Perception Team) are busy today modding any criticism as trolling, so feel free to mod this down like my other comment, rather than trying to explain why revisionism is a positive thing. I'd love to hear what Apple lose by leaving the ZFS stuff up.
Whodathunkit? A story about Apple's control freakery in rewriting history, and a comment questioning the sanity of it gets modded as Troll, I'd be living in an imaginary world if I thought Apple's image control team wouldn't mod it down. Kinda enhances the point though.
Then delay it, mark it as a target for the next release after this one. Review it closer the time to see if it is technically ready, if not, repeat the delay process.
If something they were planning on including changes somehow not to Apples liking, why do the control freakery thing of removing all past references to it in a vain attempt to rewrite history 1984 style? Is it not enough to just say "well, we've decided not to use it anymore, we have other plans we can't discuss yet."
People change their minds, even the almighty Steve Jobs won't get everything right (as it finally gets released) first run out. Think about the image they're trying to sell us on here, and imagine it in other contexts to see how believable it is.
A band writing and recording a song: able to play the whole thing, from start to finish, building riffs, fills, solo etc in one take. Vocals, harmonies etc all done with no practice, all in one take. Instant magic? No, it's shit. ALL bands spend ages refining stuff, getting stuff to work, playing with a riff, altering it slightly, trying variations etc to find a blend that works.
A writer sitting down to write a novel, and creating a masterpiece on the first draft. Any writer will tell you the first draft is ALWAYS very rough and will often only bear a small similarity to the final work.
By trying to rewrite history to remove all references that they were planning to use ZFS in some way and now won't is like trying to fool the world into thinking what they use instead was plan A, when it wasn't. Are Apple really this petty and small minded? Are they really so desperate to control their image of "perfection on every try"? Do they have any idea how these stunts just make them look like asshats?
I'm really not trying to flame here, but we ALL know that end products come from a LOT of ideas, some work, some don't, some work in theory until some other requirement kicks in and makes that part not work. This is a long process of trial and error, this is very natural; it happens on EVERY project, from EVERYONE ELSE, except apparently Apple.
In this case IT people will remember this latest purge of anything the Apple hierarchy have decided never happened as it is, and not IT people have no clue what a file system is, or that ZFS is one of them.
It's not as if it's an open source project where a vocal minority of IT skilled people can fork OSX and implement ZFS if Apple don't. What's the worst that can happen? Some will be disappointed until they see what Apple have up their sleeves as an alternate to ZFS which they may or may not know themselves yet. Will they abandon Apple? Not likely, Apple people tend to be very loyal and will continue to throw money at Apple for stuff. They will already have spent a fortune buying vendor locked Apple stuff, so switching to Windows or Linux will be harder. In all likelihood they wouldn't touch Windows with a barge pole as it's what sets them apart from regular PC users, and they won't have heard of Linux. So what have Apple got to lose by leaving the decision / thought processes as they happened?
Numbers are only part of it, the more important part is how many are critical allowing remote users to execute code on your local machine. On the bright side, they are at least patching them. Of course the stopping of further patching is part of the carrot to force people to open their wallets and fork out more cash to Microsoft for the latest Windows, which of course won't work on their hardware, which means buying a new PC with a new Windows license, and potentially a whole new round of updated versions of software which won't work with the latest Windows.
Ain't it great how Microsoft look after their license holders? It just makes you feel all warm and fuzzy.
This seems like Microsoft are running scared, that they don't understand how to continue robbing people blind in this economy.
1 - Vista bombed.
2 - Netbooks arrived so they had to take a huge profit hit per Windows license to keep Linux out.
3 - The economy went into recession so many of their customers are struggling to survive and expensive Microsoft upgrades which give very little ROI are not high on the agenda.
4 - Almost every department of Microsoft either loses money, barely breaks even or is facing being closed.
5 - Every new market Microsoft try to buy / bully their way into, the users don't want what Microsoft offer them.
6 - Both Microsoft's flagship earners are under threat, meaning everything else has a tightened budget.
7 - Microsoft's profits were down 32% last quarter (I think) with no realistic (from anyone other than the astroturfers) of it getting better anytime soon.
8 - The public have turned hostile towards greedy, rich CEOs / corporations who abuse the public for their own aims.
Given all these pressures is it any wonder that Microsoft want to try this tactic? They habitually lie, cheat, bully, bribe to get their way, why leave blackmail off the list? Either your policy is something we can live with or we move (more) US jobs overseas and leave you with a higher unemployment figure to deal with.
First, I think it's Ballmers usual used-car-salesman routine of bluffing to get his way rather than something Microsoft would actually carry out but then, they have been laying off a LOT of people in staggered announcements presumably so it don't sound that bad in the media. Or perhaps the rules for telling the stock exchange dictate the staggering of layoffs. Who knows, maybe Microsoft are paving the way for a full scale abandonment of the US. Maybe they've found a country more corruptible to set up base.
Second, if they did move out of the US at this time, I believe it would backfire big time on them. They'd be painted as unpatriotic, greedy bastards who bailed on the US as a major employer who wouldn't help play their part in rebuilding the US economy when it's struggling. Ordinary Americans would be hostile towards them, companies wouldn't want to be seen to be associated with them, so a program to switch everything away from Microsoft products would be in play in many corporations. Governments would be pressured to do the same.
This is why I believe Microsoft would never leave the US, certainly not when the economy is in the state it is and people are struggling financially. When times are better and the recession is over, people have money to spend on Microsoft products again, so it's not a good time to alienate them then either.
In short, it's the usual elite bluff to try and make the politicians blink and change policy. My response would be a full IRS tax inspection for the Microsoft board members personally, and Microsoft as a corporation since they seem to think THEY are in charge. Any money transferred overseas into a tax haven is seen as tax evasion and punished accordingly.
Was it listed if you switched to custom install of available updates?
"Critical fix for EI8"
"Critical fix for Windows Explorer"
".Net Framework addon for Mozilla Firefox web browser"
Or was it an unlisted update which assumed you wanted it if you just selected automatic install?
It is a feature, but that's like saying UK MPs have an expenses system that let's them rob from the UK taxpayer. They did nothing wrong......technically, because the loophole existed, they could. That's went down so well with UK voters as the media has shown.
Just how badly does a lawyer have to behave in the US to be disbarred?
That's my understanding as well. If the Palm Pre was designed aesthetically to be a clone of an Apple product with an Apple logo, then they'd have a cut and dried trademark case. Nobody is going to confuse a Palm product with an Apple one, Apple have a LOT of PR in selling people on it's brand image and love them or hate them it's products are iconic in their design.
Then again, in a society where people seem to need warnings that "this coffee may be hot", never underestimate the determination of a complete imbecile to have the ability to spend money on something. Every village has it's idiots and some of them know where the shops are.
Like any organization and it's swamp of lawyers, their job will be to find any possible loophole, regardless of whether it applies ethically and try to convince a judge that it applies in this case.
Say what???? Firefox users install addons they want via the addon manager in Firefox itself. They don't expect third parties to use other tricks to install addons, and grey out the "uninstall" option. They specially don't expect third parties from competing products which are losing market share to do this. This is NOT a misunderstanding on behalf of Firefox users.
.net which is fine as it stands. If Microsoft were genuine about playing well with others, they could easily have done what everyone else does and have it on the addons section of Mozilla's site along with all the other addons. They could have a banner available for .net developers to put on their site saying "This .net addon will improve your .net experience in Firefox, click here to install".
Microsoft have nothing but contempt for those people who choose not to use Microsoft products. How many more examples do you need to see to understand that Microsoft can't stand ANY competition. They want ALL of the market, not just a share of it.
My guess is that you fall into one of the following categories:
1 - Someone with their heads in the sand, intentionally finding other ways to look when decades of evidence is staring you in the face. A worried Microsoft shareholder perhaps?
2 - A Microsoft astroturfer trying to earn a living by defending Microsoft and passing the blame in vintage Microsoft fashion.....yes, you guessed it, it's them dumbass users again. Of course they're dumbasses, they don't use Microsoft products, right? If they don't use Microsoft products they deserve to be fucked with.
3 - A comedian who makes jokes which can be read as serious.
4 - A troll looking for responses.
From what I understand of the functionality of this plugin, it helps display sites done with Microsoft drugs like
If the developers ain't interested in developing applications for it, the end user has no reason to install it.
The price of new games is often a factor in people looking to get the same game cheaper. Gamers ain't stupid, they know that even the hottest tile today will probably be gathering dust on the shelf next week because they've completed it. They also know that trading it in is like a new car; drive off the lot and the value drops like a stone. They know that if they buy used, it's cheaper to start with, and the loss on trade in won't be so big. All for the same gaming experience.
I'm not surprised publishers want even more of the pie. When the recession hits your ability to justify HUGE bonuses, you have to look for other ways to squeeze your customers nuts. Look for the loopholes your customers are using to get your product without paying your rates, and seek to close them. Make people feel guilty for the poor CEO who can only afford 5 luxury yachts this year, then send the lobbyists into government to close this nasty legal loophole of your customers stealing from your table.
Companies demanding a cut of the deal on second hand goods is out of order to me, they make their profits on the first sale. Whatever happens after that is no business of theirs. There are all sorts of examples where this principle could turn into a joke, cars are one that have been pointed out.
He turned it into malware and attacked your computer? Wow, you must be speshul.
Meanwhile back at reality, he overstepped his boundaries and modified ABP to exempt his sites from the blocklist so adverts would show, a furore erupted and he released an update removing that change and apologized. Unless there's some other story you could point to and give us links for, this does NOT constitute either "malware" and it does NOT "attack anyones computer".
If you're looking for alternatives, first I'd suggest you look up some definitions for malware, it seems to be a word you don't understand and therefor could easily fall victim to in your search for purity. Good luck on that, meanwhile most of us grown ups will stick to NoScript and ABP.