I don't know about Vista, but on XP the default is to submit crash reports for all crashes. That includes software you are yourself developing. Yes, you soon learn to switch that off, but at least some of those reports will be from developers writing code for Vista and submitting crash reports for their own software (or testers doing so).
It's only FUD to people who decide what it says based on their own biases and an unwillingness to read the article.
What does reading the article have to do with the summary? If the summary spins things one way and yet the article draws different conclusions, then the summary is FUD. The OP said the post was FUD, not the article - I assume he means the summary, as it has been substantially changed since it was first posted. There were several sentences after the ellipses that did indeed paint a very bad picture of IE7's handling of things, in direct contradiction of the article.
There seem to be very few PHP "programmers" who actually know anything about programming, let alone security.
That's mostly because PHP (and to a lesser extent ASP and JSP) is designed to allow semi-technical people to throw rapidly pages together. The trouble is, that's about as far as most people using it take it; thus you end up with vulnerabilities that are painfully obvious to those of us with a little more experience. It's 2006, not 1996; there is absolutely no excuse for producing code with SQL injection vulnerabilities.
No language offers 100% security. Some offer features that are easy to misuse in such a way as to inadvertently introduce security holes, but there is no such thing as a "secure" programming language; bad/inexperienced coders will produce dross whatever language they use.
Is there anyone who reads/. that doesn't know that 400 light years is a little close for a galaxy?
Yes, I'd expect most of the readership to not realise that in fact. This is a general techy website, not an astro one. Would you expect most people here to know how solar cells work, or how to construct a thermocouple?
While the AC could have made his point in a rather less confrontational way, he *does* have a point. When I see a large block of text like that, my immediate reaction is to move on and read something else instead.
Would you want a brainstorming session to consist of complete sentences Only?
This isn't a brainstorming session. There is nothing at all to be gained (or lost) based on time to posting, and no reason other than inability or lack of respect for your reader to not structure your post well.
English has certain rules, and I am frequently surprised that in a place mainly frequented by techies well used to having to get config files and code syntactically and structurely correct that so many people seem to delight in ignoring them.
Who cares? Seriously, what is this obssession with Vista's launch date? I don't believe that the majority of people here are eagerly awaiting it, so they can rush out, buy it and install it, so why are we hanging on every single piece of non-news concerning it?
It'll launch when it launches. You'll get it (or not) when you get it. Until then, why the fascination? Anyone would think it was the Second Coming that we were waiting for...
An interesting post. On the one hand, you clearly know some stuff about the UK, with your reference to leaves on the line, but I can't think of anyone I know who calls it the "gogglebox"; of course, that might just be a regional thing. I also question that there is no sizable opposition to any laws; lots of people opposed the RIP Act, plenty oppose ID cards, there was rioting over the poll tax (granted, that's going back a while now), etc. That may just be a subjective question of scale, though.
But "ass" instead of "arse"? Are you sure you're a Brit?
But they are linked; it is proof of intelligence and it is on another planet. Thus it is proof, on another planet, of intelligence or equivalently, "proof of intelligence on another planet".
You're not necessarily saying that the intelligence is on that planet, no matter how many people may infer that...
Nope, it's still wrong; the terms don't elude them, in fact that's the entire problem. The *meaning* of the terms elude them, if the terms themselves eluded them (ie they weren't exposed to them) there wouldn't be a problem.
He's not talking about using stored procedures, he's talking about using bind parameters. You can still use "normal" SQL, it just prevents injection attacks.
human life will have existed for roughly half the life of the star we orbit
All that gives you is a naive estimate for the probability that at any randomly-picked instant in the planet's life, you'll pick a time that humans existed. It says nothing about the probability that we evolved, and nothing about the probability of similar life (or any other form) evolving anywhere.
I don't know about your company, but mine will upgrade to Vista the same way they upgraded to XP - when it comes preinstalled on the new PCs they buy. They also won't be upgrading Office, assuming 2000 will still run. There's also no need for new hardware to run Vista if you have a relatively recent machine; you don't need to run Aero, so you don't need a high-end graphics card.
Cost to my company of upgrading will effectively be zero, as it'll come free preinstalled on PCs that we'd have been buying anyway.
you most certainly can NOT use it regularly for YEARS without experiencing significant slowdowns and other problems, often unresolvable by malware removal programs
Actually, I most certainly can and am on both the PCs I use. Perhaps most people can't, but it is possible, and I'm not even doing anything particularly special.
So, in other words, MS has every right to revoke your license for whatever reason they desire?
You really need to read a few more EULAs; they almost all have a clause in it that says pretty much that. Doesn't necessarily mean it's enforcable, of course, but it's there.
According to the MS site, it buys you two free support incidents; further support calls are paid for. In any case, if you're going to use VS commercially it's worth spending the extra to buy at least one MSDN subscription; of course, that pulls the price up to rather nearer that of QT.
Depending on product and how it is purchased, you may be eligible for two support incidents at no-charge. These incidents apply to Full Packaged Products only and broadly speaking the following groups of products are covered - consumer products, desktop applications, desktop operating systems and developer tools.
Also, while at $700 he wasn't talking about an MSDN subscription, were he to go with that instead the following would apply:
No-charge Support Incidents as a Program Benefit or Microsoft License Type Click on the appropriate link to find out whether you are entitled to no-charge telephone or online support incidents if:
* You have a Multi Year Open license or an Open Subscription licence
* You are a member of the MSDN Programme
* You are a member of TechNet Programme
* You are a Microsoft Registered Partner
* You are a member of the Microsoft Certified Partner Programme
(Note that I can't be bothered to reconstruct the links)
So no, you don't get as much support (I assume - I actually don't know what TrollTech's support is like), but it's incorrect to say that you don't get any, even if you just buy VS.NET. (And any company serious about developing with/for MS products ought to buy at least one MSDN subscription, if only for the support...)
On top of that, community support resources for MS are at least as plentiful as those of the OSS community. Programmers working with MS tech are not fundamentally any different from those of us working with Java, or with OSS tools; we're all human, and most of us are more than happy to help out a fellow programmer in need from time to time.
They were in contravention of the licence; you're only supposed to sell MS OEM products with non-peripheral hardware. So, a £10 floppy drive is fine, but not a power cord (or a £600 laser printer, etc).
(That's assuming your entire post isn't a joke, of course...)
That we do have a real crisis in physics education.
Yes, we do, but the responses here don't actually confirm that. For all its general techiness, this site is still primarily read by computer geeks. I've been alternatly ranting and cringing at replies to physics-heavy stories here for *years*. In fact, for a while, I simply stopped reading the comments to such stories, it wasn't worth the increase in blood pressure.
I think, for me, the absolute low point was a thread disucssing what would happen if a nuke was detonated on the surface of the sun. People were seriously discussing all sorts of "possible" doomsday scenarios.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about Vista, but on XP the default is to submit crash reports for all crashes. That includes software you are yourself developing. Yes, you soon learn to switch that off, but at least some of those reports will be from developers writing code for Vista and submitting crash reports for their own software (or testers doing so).
It's only FUD to people who decide what it says based on their own biases and an unwillingness to read the article.
What does reading the article have to do with the summary? If the summary spins things one way and yet the article draws different conclusions, then the summary is FUD. The OP said the post was FUD, not the article - I assume he means the summary, as it has been substantially changed since it was first posted. There were several sentences after the ellipses that did indeed paint a very bad picture of IE7's handling of things, in direct contradiction of the article.
There seem to be very few PHP "programmers" who actually know anything about programming, let alone security.
That's mostly because PHP (and to a lesser extent ASP and JSP) is designed to allow semi-technical people to throw rapidly pages together. The trouble is, that's about as far as most people using it take it; thus you end up with vulnerabilities that are painfully obvious to those of us with a little more experience. It's 2006, not 1996; there is absolutely no excuse for producing code with SQL injection vulnerabilities.
stop using insecure programming language
No language offers 100% security. Some offer features that are easy to misuse in such a way as to inadvertently introduce security holes, but there is no such thing as a "secure" programming language; bad/inexperienced coders will produce dross whatever language they use.
Technique used, programs inserted (read root kits), codepage of files droped onto the hacked computers are just a few.
None of which can be faked or copied by others, of course.
Watching the actual routing tables and ip packets plus maybe sniffing a router on/in the area to look for other packets destined for those computers.
So the hakc originated in China - it's still a leap of supposition to go from "hackers located in CHina" to "Chinese hackers".
Is there anyone who reads /. that doesn't know that 400 light years is a little close for a galaxy?
Yes, I'd expect most of the readership to not realise that in fact. This is a general techy website, not an astro one. Would you expect most people here to know how solar cells work, or how to construct a thermocouple?
While the AC could have made his point in a rather less confrontational way, he *does* have a point. When I see a large block of text like that, my immediate reaction is to move on and read something else instead.
Would you want a brainstorming session to consist of complete sentences Only?
This isn't a brainstorming session. There is nothing at all to be gained (or lost) based on time to posting, and no reason other than inability or lack of respect for your reader to not structure your post well.
English has certain rules, and I am frequently surprised that in a place mainly frequented by techies well used to having to get config files and code syntactically and structurely correct that so many people seem to delight in ignoring them.
Who cares? Seriously, what is this obssession with Vista's launch date? I don't believe that the majority of people here are eagerly awaiting it, so they can rush out, buy it and install it, so why are we hanging on every single piece of non-news concerning it?
It'll launch when it launches. You'll get it (or not) when you get it. Until then, why the fascination? Anyone would think it was the Second Coming that we were waiting for...
An interesting post. On the one hand, you clearly know some stuff about the UK, with your reference to leaves on the line, but I can't think of anyone I know who calls it the "gogglebox"; of course, that might just be a regional thing. I also question that there is no sizable opposition to any laws; lots of people opposed the RIP Act, plenty oppose ID cards, there was rioting over the poll tax (granted, that's going back a while now), etc. That may just be a subjective question of scale, though.
But "ass" instead of "arse"? Are you sure you're a Brit?
take away the freedoms of its subjects
Just a minor point, but I'm a citizen, not a subject; it even says as much in my passport.
But they are linked; it is proof of intelligence and it is on another planet. Thus it is proof, on another planet, of intelligence or equivalently, "proof of intelligence on another planet".
You're not necessarily saying that the intelligence is on that planet, no matter how many people may infer that...
Gates was born to one of Seattle's richest lawyers, and probably hasn't ever set foot in a garage.
Where's he keep his car(s)?
Nope, it's still wrong; the terms don't elude them, in fact that's the entire problem. The *meaning* of the terms elude them, if the terms themselves eluded them (ie they weren't exposed to them) there wouldn't be a problem.
SPs? Stored procedures?
He's not talking about using stored procedures, he's talking about using bind parameters. You can still use "normal" SQL, it just prevents injection attacks.
human life will have existed for roughly half the life of the star we orbit
:)
All that gives you is a naive estimate for the probability that at any randomly-picked instant in the planet's life, you'll pick a time that humans existed. It says nothing about the probability that we evolved, and nothing about the probability of similar life (or any other form) evolving anywhere.
Nice try though
Hell of a typo if he did...
I don't know about your company, but mine will upgrade to Vista the same way they upgraded to XP - when it comes preinstalled on the new PCs they buy. They also won't be upgrading Office, assuming 2000 will still run. There's also no need for new hardware to run Vista if you have a relatively recent machine; you don't need to run Aero, so you don't need a high-end graphics card.
Cost to my company of upgrading will effectively be zero, as it'll come free preinstalled on PCs that we'd have been buying anyway.
I hope you don't wear silk, eat meat, wear leather...
you most certainly can NOT use it regularly for YEARS without experiencing significant slowdowns and other problems, often unresolvable by malware removal programs
Actually, I most certainly can and am on both the PCs I use. Perhaps most people can't, but it is possible, and I'm not even doing anything particularly special.
So, in other words, MS has every right to revoke your license for whatever reason they desire?
You really need to read a few more EULAs; they almost all have a clause in it that says pretty much that. Doesn't necessarily mean it's enforcable, of course, but it's there.
Neither does a $700 VS license.
According to the MS site, it buys you two free support incidents; further support calls are paid for. In any case, if you're going to use VS commercially it's worth spending the extra to buy at least one MSDN subscription; of course, that pulls the price up to rather nearer that of QT.
Actually, yes it does:
Also, while at $700 he wasn't talking about an MSDN subscription, were he to go with that instead the following would apply:
(Note that I can't be bothered to reconstruct the links)
So no, you don't get as much support (I assume - I actually don't know what TrollTech's support is like), but it's incorrect to say that you don't get any, even if you just buy VS.NET. (And any company serious about developing with/for MS products ought to buy at least one MSDN subscription, if only for the support...)
On top of that, community support resources for MS are at least as plentiful as those of the OSS community. Programmers working with MS tech are not fundamentally any different from those of us working with Java, or with OSS tools; we're all human, and most of us are more than happy to help out a fellow programmer in need from time to time.
They were in contravention of the licence; you're only supposed to sell MS OEM products with non-peripheral hardware. So, a £10 floppy drive is fine, but not a power cord (or a £600 laser printer, etc).
(That's assuming your entire post isn't a joke, of course...)
1kg is 2.2lbs, thus 2.3kg is 5lbs.
This is supposedly a techy site; even if you aren't familiar with SI units, google is over thataway ->.
That we do have a real crisis in physics education.
Yes, we do, but the responses here don't actually confirm that. For all its general techiness, this site is still primarily read by computer geeks. I've been alternatly ranting and cringing at replies to physics-heavy stories here for *years*. In fact, for a while, I simply stopped reading the comments to such stories, it wasn't worth the increase in blood pressure.
I think, for me, the absolute low point was a thread disucssing what would happen if a nuke was detonated on the surface of the sun. People were seriously discussing all sorts of "possible" doomsday scenarios.