Actually it was 2000 that crippled this, and part of it is because of the time to calculate free space, according to a TechNet Magazine article by Raymond Chen.
Yea, the problems of "shareholder value" and "agency theory", which are fundamentally flawed. And yes it killed GN. I plan to post another slashdot submission with more info soon. In the meantime, look at my Firehose for some links.
Well, I imagine Microsoft decided to bring the NT security system into their mainstream line of OSes for a reason.
Actually they began to try and merge the 9x/NT lines with 2000, but then there was one last 9x release with new features called Me and so the work was not finished until XP, with XP they ended up spinning the server line off and after several enhancements to XP was added to the codebase, MS released it as Server 2003. Later they decided that Vista SP1/Server 2008 and later would be based on the same codebase.
UAC is needed to convince people not to run as an admin all the time, because using earlier Windows versions as a restricted user was very difficult without being a sysadmin with extensive knowledge of Windows administration.
Not really, adding a non-admin user was quite simple if you know how. But many were too lazy to even do this (including me).
But compatiblity was an issue, and I'd add that NT 3.5 was released a full year before Win95, and MS made it mandatory that "Designed for Win95" apps also have NT 3.51 compatiblity with exceptions relating to things like DirectX. So I'd wonder why people did not test non-admin on NT 3.51. As I remember, even MS's own Office 95 screwed up here.
Badly. I got pushed from the technical lead into a VP position managing that whole end of the business in a mid-cap company. In that role I got pulled into budget battles, which are normal, relationship management with partners, also normal and locked into the quarterly numbers game, which means a lot of meetings with the auditors. Too keep the technical aspects on track we had to bring in a new technical guy. You can see where this is going. I could have fired the new tech guy so I had a job to go back to when we streamlined after the initial development phase but it just didn't seem fair. I got a nice bonus and severance, plus my options were golden, but I essentially worked myself out of a job and was penalized for hiring competent people.
Yea. the APIs of Windows versions prior to Windows 7/Server 2008 R2 used bitfields for processor affinity, meaning that the 64-bit version was limited to 64 logical processors. Which was fine until the 8-core Nehalem-EX came along with hyper-threading too. 8 cores times 2 threads times 4 physical processors equals 64 logical processors. Windows 7 had to introduce new APIs for processor affinity in order to allow more than 64 logical processors.
Another example I can think of off the top of my head is GoDaddy's Bob Parsons. Yep, the CEO with a radio show, which caused trouble during an attempt to IPO in the year 2006 thanks to the quiet period, ultimately this IPO had to be pulled for this and other reasons! And to think the SEC relaxed the rules for this in December 2005 thanks to Google and Salesforce breaking them during their IPOs in the year 2004! And I wonder how Wall Street would react to such a CEO if the IPO did succeed.
What is interesting is why that is, of course. I mean, corporations like this was why in the early days the United States put strict controls on corporations in the first place, I think.
Yep, unfortunately Alpha was dropped at the last minute, like less than 6 months before Win2K RTM. But then came Itanium or IA64, and later AMD64 or x64.
In particular you should hate the quarterly earning game. In fact you should hate shareholder value and agency theory in general. But it is not why MS became evil.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually it was 2000 that crippled this, and part of it is because of the time to calculate free space, according to a TechNet Magazine article by Raymond Chen.
I found a thread about it here in another Slashdot article: http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1146813&cid=27050245 One reply suggests that changes to the tax system may to be blame.
Yea, the problems of "shareholder value" and "agency theory", which are fundamentally flawed. And yes it killed GN. I plan to post another slashdot submission with more info soon. In the meantime, look at my Firehose for some links.
"Mainframe = NY" Or to be more precise, Poughkeepsie.
Well, I imagine Microsoft decided to bring the NT security system into their mainstream line of OSes for a reason.
Actually they began to try and merge the 9x/NT lines with 2000, but then there was one last 9x release with new features called Me and so the work was not finished until XP, with XP they ended up spinning the server line off and after several enhancements to XP was added to the codebase, MS released it as Server 2003. Later they decided that Vista SP1/Server 2008 and later would be based on the same codebase.
UAC is needed to convince people not to run as an admin all the time, because using earlier Windows versions as a restricted user was very difficult without being a sysadmin with extensive knowledge of Windows administration.
Not really, adding a non-admin user was quite simple if you know how. But many were too lazy to even do this (including me). But compatiblity was an issue, and I'd add that NT 3.5 was released a full year before Win95, and MS made it mandatory that "Designed for Win95" apps also have NT 3.51 compatiblity with exceptions relating to things like DirectX. So I'd wonder why people did not test non-admin on NT 3.51. As I remember, even MS's own Office 95 screwed up here.
Badly. I got pushed from the technical lead into a VP position managing that whole end of the business in a mid-cap company. In that role I got pulled into budget battles, which are normal, relationship management with partners, also normal and locked into the quarterly numbers game, which means a lot of meetings with the auditors. Too keep the technical aspects on track we had to bring in a new technical guy. You can see where this is going. I could have fired the new tech guy so I had a job to go back to when we streamlined after the initial development phase but it just didn't seem fair. I got a nice bonus and severance, plus my options were golden, but I essentially worked myself out of a job and was penalized for hiring competent people.
Sounds like you had to "maximize shareholder value", which is so fundamentally flawed it isn't even funny. I even submitted a link to a paper on these flaws to Slashdot: http://slashdot.org/submission/1125550/Ghoshals-paper-on-the-flaws-of-shareholder-value
Yea. the APIs of Windows versions prior to Windows 7/Server 2008 R2 used bitfields for processor affinity, meaning that the 64-bit version was limited to 64 logical processors. Which was fine until the 8-core Nehalem-EX came along with hyper-threading too. 8 cores times 2 threads times 4 physical processors equals 64 logical processors. Windows 7 had to introduce new APIs for processor affinity in order to allow more than 64 logical processors.
Not to mention that if you read the interviews, you will see that Sergey Brin himself got irritated at the lack of a Mac version of Chrome.
Matt Cutts at Google even has a MS-free challenge: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/30-days-no-microsoft-software/
So it was probably a temporary problem.
Yep, it is listed in FSF's list of confusing or loaded words: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Piracy
I know, usually what I do to detect these is looking at the URL in the status bar.
Don't forget Windows Scripting Host too, I once used it to program with VBS.
Another example I can think of off the top of my head is GoDaddy's Bob Parsons. Yep, the CEO with a radio show, which caused trouble during an attempt to IPO in the year 2006 thanks to the quiet period, ultimately this IPO had to be pulled for this and other reasons! And to think the SEC relaxed the rules for this in December 2005 thanks to Google and Salesforce breaking them during their IPOs in the year 2004! And I wonder how Wall Street would react to such a CEO if the IPO did succeed.
What is interesting is why that is, of course. I mean, corporations like this was why in the early days the United States put strict controls on corporations in the first place, I think.
Yep, the patent was called the Guard Time patent, and was patent number 4,549,302, owned by Hayes. The latter modems to be more precise used TIES. Hayes even ended up advertising in magazines about the dangers of TIES, as well as inserting it into the beginning of press releases. The modem makers using it responded with lawsuits, forcing Hayes to pull the ads off.
He as recently as 2005 worked on the port of Windows to x64, I think.
MS Word had great import and export capabilities when WordPerfect was the market leader, and so did Excel when Lotus 1-2-3 was the market leader.
Yep, read this article from Joel on Software:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000052.html
But why do you think the music industry was forced to eliminate DRM?
Yep, unfortunately Alpha was dropped at the last minute, like less than 6 months before Win2K RTM. But then came Itanium or IA64, and later AMD64 or x64.
Yep, particularly since Netscape had a similar vision of reducing Windows to just "a buggy set of drivers".
"Don't hate the players, hate the game."
In particular you should hate the quarterly earning game. In fact you should hate shareholder value and agency theory in general. But it is not why MS became evil.
It did force Apple to introduce DRM-free music in the iTunes Store, though.
If it kills bacteria in 12 seconds, it's "not nice stuff".
Another example from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/02/08/finally-something-good-you-can-do-with-your-microwave.aspx : "Interestingly, the microwave was even able to kill B. cereus spores, which are able to survive extreme heat and radiation (though it took four minutes, not two). It's no wonder, then, why heating food in a microwave changes the physical structure of foods, with virtually unknown consequences. "
Why do you think Facebook is going dual class?