IE development ended (sort of) Outlook express development ended Service packs under long delay
Just an observation.
The economy is slowing down and they're focusing on things that will make them money, perhaps? At one point 20% of Microsoft's development force was working on Internet Explorer and related technology --- they can't keep up that rate of development on loss leaders -- especially when shareholders are getting anxious. After paying out dividends for the first time a while back, they're starting to act like more of a blue chip company and less like an innovative (I know, I know, spare me the sarcasm) company.
this virus is the latest in a well-populated freakin' pantheon of examples of their failure to be able to provide anything of the sort.
How is this Microsoft's fault? It's the stupid users who are opening the attachments, not Microsoft, the virus is not related to Outlook in particular even in the slightest. Your precious Thunderbird would be just as susceptable to it. Linux is just as susceptable to this sort of attack if the virus in question happened to a be a.pl file.
If you have control over such things in your company, please get them to either copy the statement of opposition to SCO that I wrote to your company's website or write and post your own statement of opposition.
The company I work at is desperately looking for an exit strategy from our current SCO-based offering; but we can't find any product comparable to Sentinel (block-level hot disk mirroring over a network to a standby system) on Linux.
I seem to remember there being MORE to programming than objects.
The.NET Framework excels at interoperability, and the key to that is their OOP system; so obviously that's what they're going to point out as the killer feature. In my opinion, you're wasting your time with.NET if you're not going to take advantage of the platform to its fullest; but there's nothing stopping you from putting your procedural code into a thin object wrapper; and Microsoft Research has put together a few reference implementations of some functional languages -- but those are "fringe" languages, so they don't get top billing.
The real solution isn't to keep trying to dodge the bullet. The solution to become bulletproof.
Even after all this time, Microsoft still doesn't seem to get that.
I can guarantee you they "get it". New development at Microsoft these days undergoes more stringent security evaluation than I'm sure most companies do. But Microsoft has tons of unchecked software out in the world, and once the bullet's been fired, the only thing you can do is try to dodge it.
We're not going to see a substantial improvement in the number of Microsoft-related security incidents until a substantial portion of the world moves to a Win2K3+ operating system.
So now, when we face a choice between adding features and resolving security issues, we need to choose security.
Apparently he changed his mind.
Microsoft is all about security these days. Unfortunately they're bogged down under the weight of the operating systems they released before their big internal security push. It's a black eye for the company that Windows Server 2003 was affected by the RPC hole, but I can't really fault them for that... the RPC service is core functionality deep in the OS and slipped their audit. It's not as if Open Source software has never found bugs in previously audited code either.
A good example of this is the changes we made in Outlook to avoid email borne viruses.
I must've been absent when that came true.
So when's the last time you saw an Outlook virus? (Trojan horse attachments aren't exactly Outlook's fault; and Outlook even does a decent job of blocking most of those at the door.)
Anyway, my idea for an open source number generator is to have people on slashdot post the first number that comes to mind in this thread. I don't know if it could get more random.... (patent pending)
Adbuster suggested that either we revoke corporate personhood, or we institute the death penalty for corporations that cannot behave. Ahem, can anyone think of any corporations we might apply this to?
Corporations do have a death penalty: the Government can revoke their corporate charter. You don't see it very often, but it does happen.
Good luck trying to convince anyone that it's in everyone's best interest to shut down a company that employs thousands of people though.
I think it's funny you're responding cynically to their FUD-laden scaremongering about backdoors and viruses being spread through file sharing programs with equally FUD-laden scaremongering about security holes in Windows.
The error reporting mechanism in Windows does not report system crashes (a la those pretty blue screens that say IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL), to my knowledge.
You are wrong. When you trigger a STOP error (the NT equivalent of a BSOD) on XP, under the default settings, the system will dump its state to disk and automatically reboot. (This is, in fact, usually what causes "spontaneous reboots" in XP).
Upon reboot, the system checks to see if there's a crash log on disk, and if so, it packages it up and prompts the user to send it to Microsoft when they log in. The window looks almost identical to the Application Error Reporting window, in fact.
If you've changed the OS not to dump state on a STOP, or if you've turned off Error Reporting in general, you won't see this behavior.
I'm quite sure there is a patch up already on windows update. My computer was patched just hours ago. I really don't see anything special about this story. What's so special about this flaw?
It's a Microsoft bug, it doesn't matter how important it is. You're supposed to be foaming at the mouth and making sweeping statements about how this proves open source is better! Don't you know what website you're on?
What you mentioned is all fine and good, and perhaps it would be nice to see your kids make it to school all safe and sound from your pc, but don't make the mistake that all parents are as altruistic as you may be. I imagine a great deal of parents will use these as house-arrest devices, tracking every movement of thier kids all the way through 18 years of age.
Hating the technology because of what people could do with it is the exact same reasoning that led to the creation of the DMCA and its attempts to ban anything that could possibly be used in a copyright violation (like Sharpie pens).
The people that misuse the technology are the problem, not the technology itself, which has perfectly legit, acceptable uses.
Answer: no. You shouldn't be using a required hardware upgrade to drive a major software change. That's a bad practise to get into. You should be approving the minor software upgrade to SCO 5.0.7.
Exactly. I'm glad to see a reasoned answer to this here, and rated 5. Upgrading Openserver 5.0.5 to 5.0.7 presented absolutely no technical challenges or incompatibilites with our software when we did it in my company.
It seems like all the those who play and review the game are excusing the mediocrity every other sentance, example: "The missions may all be the same, but I really enjoy going on them with my friends." (made up example)
That exactly describes SWG. It's an excellent game saddled by a piss-poor implementation (or, more accurately, an implementation forced out the door a year too early by overzealous executives looking to boost profits for the quarter).
A lot of people enjoy the game, myself included, despite the flaws; but it's not a game for the cynical or easily frustrated. It reminds me a lot of Ultima Online's early months with strange, inexplicable bugs; not total breakage like the release of Anarchy Online.
Quake is a C project. C, not C++, as many have said. This invalidates all of the points you make. Now try again.
Quake2.NET is a C++ project. Not C. That invalidates your point and thus revalidates the original point, that this is a project that can be pointed to as proof that.NET can handle large managed C++ projects.
A C framebuffer (that means 2D, and yes quake II is an app that doesn't use any 3D api, it's all in the engine itself the magic happens) app can be ported to everything with minimal effort ( download a few demos and port them to QT, Allegro, SDL, and DirectX), it won't take you very long.
Quake 2 uses OpenGL.
Also, as the fill rate is the limiting factor, there will not be a very big performance difference in any of the versions.
Fill rate is the limiting factor on any newer game that stresses your 3D hardware (and even then, only at a certain point). Quake 2 has been out for quite a long time now and its graphics are not cutting edge. Fill rate is not the limiting factor in this case.
What they can do is put out a service pack (or in the probable case of Longhorn, an entire OS release) that breaks your game. Ideally, you release a patch; the problem is the worst case, where you (the developer) have to go out and get an entire new toolchain (new copy of Visual Studio, etc). Even though update prices are usually modest, you may not want to keep lots of VMWare images on your hard drive, multiple toolchains, etc.
FUD, FUD, FUD. If you develop your software correctly for Windows, there's little they can do to single out your application for breakage in a Service Pack or OS upgrade without incredible amounts of colateral damage with anything short of single-application detection (like they did with DR-DOS, but haven't been credibly accused of doing since).
The rest of your post is just as thick in the FUD department. Microsoft isn't "forcing" upgrades from NT4; they're simply not supporting NT4. You can still get support from a third party, and you can still purchase NT4 licenses by downgrading an XP license. Hell you can even still buy MS-DOS licenses.
They technology (or at least the hype around it) is at odds with the business reality at MS.
MS claim that.NET will be open and cross platform, but the only way this can happen is if cross platform means "across *our* platforms."
.NET is about interoperability, not cross-platform execution. The big reason Microsoft is behind.NET is to get Windows a foothold in shops currently based around Unix.
their.NET CRM application talks to the financial application through BizTalk
Microsoft is currently developing a.NET solution to replace the old Great Plains package. These things take time though, so they're maintaining the old code base while they do so.
Would sure be nice if you could nail any spammer from anywhere in the US if you're a Michigan system... I bet it'd be a good place to set up an email server too.
It'd technically be possible to. As the recipient of the email, you're one half of the 'business transaction', meaning that your venue is appropriate jurisdiction for the case, regardless of where the spammer is from (as long as they're in the U.S., of course).
Maybe I'll turn off TMDA for a while and see if I can net me some spammers.
Slashdot Mirror
IE development ended (sort of)
Outlook express development ended
Service packs under long delay
Just an observation.
The economy is slowing down and they're focusing on things that will make them money, perhaps? At one point 20% of Microsoft's development force was working on Internet Explorer and related technology --- they can't keep up that rate of development on loss leaders -- especially when shareholders are getting anxious. After paying out dividends for the first time a while back, they're starting to act like more of a blue chip company and less like an innovative (I know, I know, spare me the sarcasm) company.
this virus is the latest in a well-populated freakin' pantheon of examples of their failure to be able to provide anything of the sort.
.pl file.
How is this Microsoft's fault? It's the stupid users who are opening the attachments, not Microsoft, the virus is not related to Outlook in particular even in the slightest. Your precious Thunderbird would be just as susceptable to it. Linux is just as susceptable to this sort of attack if the virus in question happened to a be a
If you have control over such things in your company, please get them to either copy the statement of opposition to SCO that I wrote to your company's website or write and post your own statement of opposition.
The company I work at is desperately looking for an exit strategy from our current SCO-based offering; but we can't find any product comparable to Sentinel (block-level hot disk mirroring over a network to a standby system) on Linux.
I seem to remember there being MORE to programming than objects.
.NET Framework excels at interoperability, and the key to that is their OOP system; so obviously that's what they're going to point out as the killer feature. In my opinion, you're wasting your time with .NET if you're not going to take advantage of the platform to its fullest; but there's nothing stopping you from putting your procedural code into a thin object wrapper; and Microsoft Research has put together a few reference implementations of some functional languages -- but those are "fringe" languages, so they don't get top billing.
The
The real solution isn't to keep trying to dodge the bullet.
The solution to become bulletproof.
Even after all this time, Microsoft still doesn't seem to get that.
I can guarantee you they "get it". New development at Microsoft these days undergoes more stringent security evaluation than I'm sure most companies do. But Microsoft has tons of unchecked software out in the world, and once the bullet's been fired, the only thing you can do is try to dodge it.
We're not going to see a substantial improvement in the number of Microsoft-related security incidents until a substantial portion of the world moves to a Win2K3+ operating system.
So now, when we face a choice between adding features and resolving security issues, we need to choose security.
Apparently he changed his mind.
Microsoft is all about security these days. Unfortunately they're bogged down under the weight of the operating systems they released before their big internal security push. It's a black eye for the company that Windows Server 2003 was affected by the RPC hole, but I can't really fault them for that... the RPC service is core functionality deep in the OS and slipped their audit. It's not as if Open Source software has never found bugs in previously audited code either.
A good example of this is the changes we made in Outlook to avoid email borne viruses.
I must've been absent when that came true.
So when's the last time you saw an Outlook virus? (Trojan horse attachments aren't exactly Outlook's fault; and Outlook even does a decent job of blocking most of those at the door.)
Lip + service = $$$
FUD + Anti-Microsoft Rant = Karma?
Sorry everyone, this one was my fault... I accidentally plugged my toaster oven in the same outlet as my microwave. :(
Anyway, my idea for an open source number generator is to have people on slashdot post the first number that comes to mind in this thread. I don't know if it could get more random.... (patent pending)
69
42
Adbuster suggested that either we revoke corporate personhood, or we institute the death penalty for corporations that cannot behave. Ahem, can anyone think of any corporations we might apply this to?
Corporations do have a death penalty: the Government can revoke their corporate charter. You don't see it very often, but it does happen.
Good luck trying to convince anyone that it's in everyone's best interest to shut down a company that employs thousands of people though.
Instead, he responds to inputs by choosing the most appropriate epigram in his database, making him a sort of walking repository of clever one-liners.
/usr/games/fortune with keyword weighting?
So it's basically
New Microsoft Mouse Scrolls Both Ways
Sweet! Does this mean we'll finally get some mouse-on-mouse action?
....your Microsoft O/S is completely secure.
I think it's funny you're responding cynically to their FUD-laden scaremongering about backdoors and viruses being spread through file sharing programs with equally FUD-laden scaremongering about security holes in Windows.
Though I'm sure the irony will be lost on you.
The error reporting mechanism in Windows does not report system crashes (a la those pretty blue screens that say IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL), to my knowledge.
You are wrong. When you trigger a STOP error (the NT equivalent of a BSOD) on XP, under the default settings, the system will dump its state to disk and automatically reboot. (This is, in fact, usually what causes "spontaneous reboots" in XP).
Upon reboot, the system checks to see if there's a crash log on disk, and if so, it packages it up and prompts the user to send it to Microsoft when they log in. The window looks almost identical to the Application Error Reporting window, in fact.
If you've changed the OS not to dump state on a STOP, or if you've turned off Error Reporting in general, you won't see this behavior.
I recently took a job managing an all Windows network.
Were they aware that you have no idea what you're doing when they hired you?
I'm quite sure there is a patch up already on windows update. My computer was patched just hours ago. I really don't see anything special about this story. What's so special about this flaw?
It's a Microsoft bug, it doesn't matter how important it is. You're supposed to be foaming at the mouth and making sweeping statements about how this proves open source is better! Don't you know what website you're on?
What you mentioned is all fine and good, and perhaps it would be nice to see your kids make it to school all safe and sound from your pc, but don't make the mistake that all parents are as altruistic as you may be. I imagine a great deal of parents will use these as house-arrest devices, tracking every movement of thier kids all the way through 18 years of age.
Hating the technology because of what people could do with it is the exact same reasoning that led to the creation of the DMCA and its attempts to ban anything that could possibly be used in a copyright violation (like Sharpie pens).
The people that misuse the technology are the problem, not the technology itself, which has perfectly legit, acceptable uses.
No, I said Severn. Severn is a version of Nine.
It's a marketing ploy, pure and simple. What geek wouldn't want to "beta test" Severn of Nine?
Answer: no. You shouldn't be using a required hardware upgrade to drive a major software change. That's a bad practise to get into. You should be approving the minor software upgrade to SCO 5.0.7.
Exactly. I'm glad to see a reasoned answer to this here, and rated 5. Upgrading Openserver 5.0.5 to 5.0.7 presented absolutely no technical challenges or incompatibilites with our software when we did it in my company.
It seems like all the those who play and review the game are excusing the mediocrity every other sentance, example: "The missions may all be the same, but I really enjoy going on them with my friends." (made up example)
That exactly describes SWG. It's an excellent game saddled by a piss-poor implementation (or, more accurately, an implementation forced out the door a year too early by overzealous executives looking to boost profits for the quarter).
A lot of people enjoy the game, myself included, despite the flaws; but it's not a game for the cynical or easily frustrated. It reminds me a lot of Ultima Online's early months with strange, inexplicable bugs; not total breakage like the release of Anarchy Online.
Surely you mean it's own open format?
No, it's own proprietary format, as in "designed by them, and only used by them".
Quake is a C project. C, not C++, as many have said. This invalidates all of the points you make. Now try again.
.NET can handle large managed C++ projects.
Quake2.NET is a C++ project. Not C. That invalidates your point and thus revalidates the original point, that this is a project that can be pointed to as proof that
A C framebuffer (that means 2D, and yes quake II is an app that doesn't use any 3D api, it's all in the engine itself the magic happens) app can be ported to everything with minimal effort ( download a few demos and port them to QT, Allegro, SDL, and DirectX), it won't take you very long.
Quake 2 uses OpenGL.
Also, as the fill rate is the limiting factor, there will not be a very big performance difference in any of the versions.
Fill rate is the limiting factor on any newer game that stresses your 3D hardware (and even then, only at a certain point). Quake 2 has been out for quite a long time now and its graphics are not cutting edge. Fill rate is not the limiting factor in this case.
What they can do is put out a service pack (or in the probable case of Longhorn, an entire OS release) that breaks your game. Ideally, you release a patch; the problem is the worst case, where you (the developer) have to go out and get an entire new toolchain (new copy of Visual Studio, etc). Even though update prices are usually modest, you may not want to keep lots of VMWare images on your hard drive, multiple toolchains, etc.
FUD, FUD, FUD. If you develop your software correctly for Windows, there's little they can do to single out your application for breakage in a Service Pack or OS upgrade without incredible amounts of colateral damage with anything short of single-application detection (like they did with DR-DOS, but haven't been credibly accused of doing since).
The rest of your post is just as thick in the FUD department. Microsoft isn't "forcing" upgrades from NT4; they're simply not supporting NT4. You can still get support from a third party, and you can still purchase NT4 licenses by downgrading an XP license. Hell you can even still buy MS-DOS licenses.
They technology (or at least the hype around it) is at odds with the business reality at MS.
.NET will be open and cross platform, but the only way this can happen is if cross platform means "across *our* platforms."
.NET is about interoperability, not cross-platform execution. The big reason Microsoft is behind .NET is to get Windows a foothold in shops currently based around Unix.
MS claim that
their .NET CRM application talks to the financial application through BizTalk
.NET solution to replace the old Great Plains package. These things take time though, so they're maintaining the old code base while they do so.
Microsoft is currently developing a
Would sure be nice if you could nail any spammer from anywhere in the US if you're a Michigan system... I bet it'd be a good place to set up an email server too.
It'd technically be possible to. As the recipient of the email, you're one half of the 'business transaction', meaning that your venue is appropriate jurisdiction for the case, regardless of where the spammer is from (as long as they're in the U.S., of course).
Maybe I'll turn off TMDA for a while and see if I can net me some spammers.