this isn't a new feature - every mp3 player ever has had the ability
Hell, for that matter, I still have a 6 disc Panasonic hi-fi CD player from 15 or so years ago that has a shuffle feature; either on the current disc or over all of them.
I don't remember ever really using it, and now I have an iRiver, I don't use shuffle on that, either. I actually generally prefer to listen to whole albums (perhaps skipping less-well liked tracks).
You're lucky then. I went to see Shaun of the Dead on Friday (in the UK), and someone a row or two behind me had their phone go off. Not only that, but they answered it; luckily (for all concerned) they didn't speak for very long.
Are folks really that dumb in LA
Believe me, stupidity and lack of consideration for those around you is hardly unique to LA...
Many Windows apps, however, are written with a permissive environment like Windows 95/98 in mind... additional users created as part of a Windows XP installation have Administrator privileges by default
Your first point is the reason for your second. There are far too many applications (and programmers thereof) that think they need to be able to write to system directories (Program Files, Windows, etc) for MS to have made user accounts unprivileged by default in XP. This is the first time that MS has released an OS with any real sort of access restrictions that's targetted specifically at home users.
It's going to take time to make the transition - they have a hell of a lot of people to educate, both users and developers. After all, imagine the flack that MS would take if their new OS suddenly broke *the vast majority* of existing (home) software... I would be surprised if Longhorn displayed the same behaviour regarding user accounts though - I expect it to be rather more sensible in that regard.
They probably couldn't find every possible flaw and patch it before it leaves Redmond
No arguments here, but I don't think that's what the OP meant. I read it as "why can't PC manufacturers and retailers ensure that no PC is shipped until all the latest (security) patches have been applied?"
Seriously - if you buy a new PC off the shelf from a store, what's to stop them from plugging it in and patching it? Not only would it help to reduce problems in the short term, it would demonstrate that it worked! From my personal experience (in the UK), the time most shops spend trying to get you to agree to extended warranties and/or finance options would be much better spent doing something like that. Of course, the sales guys don't get commission based on how helpful they are...
Eye candy is important. I spend in excess of 10 hours on an average day staring at my monitor; what's being displayed on it had better be pleasing to my eyes.
Sure, flashy, hardware-accelerated graphics might not make my job easier, but it might help make it just that little bit more pleasurable.
Where by "fixed" you mean that it's now a configurable option, of course - Tools -> Options -> Security tab.
I do agree with your other comments, though - as is so often here, the complaint being made is no longer relevant...
Re:Sure, if you can dumb it down into a kisok...
on
A Babe in Tuxland
·
· Score: 1
A Windows-expert parent could set up Windows to be the same way.
Indeed. My four year old daughter has been using her Mum's PC (running XP Home) for over a year now with no problems. All I did was set up a limited user account for her. Sometimes, older software (that still wants to write to Program Files, etc) has to be started by one of us grown-ups, using the "Run As..." service to give it the permission it needs, but other than that it's fine.
I'll never forget the first time she typed her own name; her understanding of how to use the PC for what she uses it for is comparable to that of some adults I know.
If they saw this, with a properly wordes sales pitch "free, no viruses, cool geek factor" etc, I think a "sale" would be easier.
I think you'll probably find that most people really don't want to be thought of as geeks. Sure, we've taken on the label with a kind of pride, but we're not most people.
That said, I agree with you about the GUI. One of the reasons I stopped using Linux (after having used it in some capacity for about 4 years) is that, to my eyes, XP is just prettier. Also, I was doing stuff (.net development, games playing) that I simply can't do under Linux, but at work, the eye candy was the deciding factor (OS X is not an option, before anyone mentions that).
I spend all day most days staring at my monitor; what's on it has to be aesthetically pleasing. Obviously, that's a highly subjective matter, but for me, right now, for me it's XP, not Linux.
No, but clicking on the appropriate shortcut icon to access the CD player is; as long as you have everything installed, then it Just Works. It's been a while since I used KDE (or Linux, for that matter), but that was a *seriously* cool feature.
How many people under 20 will remember a time before CDs? I seriously doubt any of them would have been buying music before CDs became widespread.
Neither do they seem to care that an album costs $18
I doubt if many of them have much to compare it to, other than DVDs (comparable) and console/PC games (much more expensive). Sure, I remember buying cassettes, but then I'm just barely under 30, not 20...
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE -> SOFTWARE ->Autodesk ->
AutoCAD -> R14.0 -> ACAD-12:409 ->
Applications -> AecBase -> LOADCTRLS is supposed to be set to 0x0000000d (13) (as opposed to say 5)
I suggest you take that complaint up with Autodesk; MS can hardly be held responsible for how other companies store their apps' configuration settings, and the documentation they may or may not provide.
True, MS are just as bad in this respect, but surely you could have picked a better example? That's like saying that text config fles are bad, because of sendmail's one.
Yes, I have, I'm using one right now (or at least, I should be;-) ). JBuilder is plenty fast enough for me. No, I'm not trying to run it on an old P2 with 128meg of RAM, but that's not the sort of machine that people buy. Hell, 15 months ago I bought what I considered to be a bog-standard machine - P4 2.6Ghz with 512meg of RAM.
Maybe my expectations have been set too high (I'm a Java developer and gamer), but frankly, I don't think that's a "super machine". To me, a super machine would be at least 2-way SMP with a gig or two of RAM and large, fast disks.
Then a third-party vendor asks, "Hey, can we get in on this? Have our software phone home telling how the owner uses it. Then we can improve future versions." Annoying, but for a good cause, right?
They can do that now - the only thing that trusted computing could possibly add to this is the ability to prevent me from firewalling off the application or uninstalling it completely. Even now, if I firewall it, it can disable itself.
Then the data this third-party is getting shows that people are jumping ship on their application for one that costs less, and they cripple cross-functionality...and keep sending updates to your computer even if you patch it back the way you want it to be. But you don't get to say anything, because you clicked Yes on the EULA.
Oh, I get to say *plenty* about that, EULA or not. That's the sort of thing I'd be perfectly willing to challenge in court. No, I'd not be assured of winning, but at the same time, I'd not be assured of losing, either. That would be for the court to decide. No, I'd rather it not come to that, but I'd not just accept it meekly, either.
Merely accepting an agreement does not necessarily mean that if push came to shove I would have to be bound by it - a company cannot just put anything they like in it. As an extreme example, if the EULA stated that if I ever used a competing product, I would have to give them my daughter, there's no way in Hell that would ever stand up in court. Yes, that is a purposefully ridiculous example, but the point is that just because I say "yeah, sure, whatever" doesn't mean it'll actually happen. Between the obviously enforceable and the obviously unenforceable is a wide expanse of grey.
Well, if they don't have a licence to be running it at home, then frankly that's a *good* thing. Copyright infringement is copyright infringement, whether it's MS's copyright or some a GPLed project's copyright that's being infringed.
Of all the reasons to complain about the trusted computing intiative, lack of ability to infringe copyright is not the one to use.
But that's his point. On Windows, you download the appropriate setup program, and run it. That's it - there's no system tool to learn to use, you just run an executable.
Your suggestion is only really valid for updating the base OS install. I can't use KPackage to download and install an arbitrary third-party application. That's not something a system tool can sensibly be expected to do, unless you force all application developers to register their stuff with it.
You're happy enough to let Windows setup programs do all the hard work for you, why not do the same in Linux?
That's exactly what he wants. Your suggestion is akin to trying to use Windows Update to install third-party apps, though - it simply won't work.
Yes - for those ones that it runs. Right now, with games especially, that's a rather small subset of the whole.
The point stands - if you're buying a computer with a specific task or set of tasks in mind, you should buy the software that best enables you to perform those tasks, and that includes the OS. Right now, if playing games is on your list, then while you can certainly dual-boot, you definitely want Windows on there as well.
I watch videos (using Gentoo's win32 codecs ebuild)
Am I the only one to notice the irony in having to piggy-back on the Windows codecs to get basic stuff done in Linux? Not to mention that for some of those codecs at least, the legality of doing this is somewhat questionable, I believe. (I'm thinking of MS EULAs forbidding use of components without an appropriate Windows licence)
If anything, your comment helps to show just how far Linux does still have to come; you can't watch videos without using Windows-specific software. Not to knock the various Linux distros - they're all doing a superb job in less than ideal conditions. They're just not quite there yet, is all.
Fair use is a nice idea, but as a legal concept it doesn't necessarily exist.
I agree wholeheartedly that I should be allowed to rip any CD, cassette, LP, etc that I have bought to whatever format I like, in order to be able to listen to it more conveniently. Eg, I should be legally allowed to convert my entire CD collection to oggs to play on my nice, shiny new iRiver HP-120.
Unfortunately, I live in the UK, where doing so without explicit permission is copyright infringement. Oh sure, no-one is ever going to get sued for it, much less lose a court case over it, but that's not the point. I do not have explicit permission from the copyright holders to do what I have done, so I have broken the law.
Just ending up in a non-US court would guarantee nothing. Each country has its own version of the RIAA, and its own copyright laws, not all of which have any concept of fair use.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, I have an anecdote too!
The last time *I* got dual monitors working under Windows (about two months ago) it took 2 minutes and didn't involve the CLI at all.
Well, technically, you're imposing your value on them that censorship is a bad thing and should not be practiced.
there's not a machine around that isn't riddled with the stuff
Well, I can think of 5 off the top of my head - the one I'm sat at now, my girlfriend's, my daughter's, and the two I have at work.
Sure, malware is a huge problem, but please, don't think that all of us are clueless [l]users just because we chose not to be admins.
this isn't a new feature - every mp3 player ever has had the ability
Hell, for that matter, I still have a 6 disc Panasonic hi-fi CD player from 15 or so years ago that has a shuffle feature; either on the current disc or over all of them.
I don't remember ever really using it, and now I have an iRiver, I don't use shuffle on that, either. I actually generally prefer to listen to whole albums (perhaps skipping less-well liked tracks).
You're lucky then. I went to see Shaun of the Dead on Friday (in the UK), and someone a row or two behind me had their phone go off. Not only that, but they answered it; luckily (for all concerned) they didn't speak for very long.
Are folks really that dumb in LA
Believe me, stupidity and lack of consideration for those around you is hardly unique to LA...
Many Windows apps, however, are written with a permissive environment like Windows 95/98 in mind... additional users created as part of a Windows XP installation have Administrator privileges by default
Your first point is the reason for your second. There are far too many applications (and programmers thereof) that think they need to be able to write to system directories (Program Files, Windows, etc) for MS to have made user accounts unprivileged by default in XP. This is the first time that MS has released an OS with any real sort of access restrictions that's targetted specifically at home users.
It's going to take time to make the transition - they have a hell of a lot of people to educate, both users and developers. After all, imagine the flack that MS would take if their new OS suddenly broke *the vast majority* of existing (home) software... I would be surprised if Longhorn displayed the same behaviour regarding user accounts though - I expect it to be rather more sensible in that regard.
They probably couldn't find every possible flaw and patch it before it leaves Redmond
No arguments here, but I don't think that's what the OP meant. I read it as "why can't PC manufacturers and retailers ensure that no PC is shipped until all the latest (security) patches have been applied?"
Seriously - if you buy a new PC off the shelf from a store, what's to stop them from plugging it in and patching it? Not only would it help to reduce problems in the short term, it would demonstrate that it worked! From my personal experience (in the UK), the time most shops spend trying to get you to agree to extended warranties and/or finance options would be much better spent doing something like that. Of course, the sales guys don't get commission based on how helpful they are...
Eye candy is important. I spend in excess of 10 hours on an average day staring at my monitor; what's being displayed on it had better be pleasing to my eyes.
Sure, flashy, hardware-accelerated graphics might not make my job easier, but it might help make it just that little bit more pleasurable.
Where by "fixed" you mean that it's now a configurable option, of course - Tools -> Options -> Security tab.
I do agree with your other comments, though - as is so often here, the complaint being made is no longer relevant...
A Windows-expert parent could set up Windows to be the same way.
Indeed. My four year old daughter has been using her Mum's PC (running XP Home) for over a year now with no problems. All I did was set up a limited user account for her. Sometimes, older software (that still wants to write to Program Files, etc) has to be started by one of us grown-ups, using the "Run As..." service to give it the permission it needs, but other than that it's fine.
I'll never forget the first time she typed her own name; her understanding of how to use the PC for what she uses it for is comparable to that of some adults I know.
If they saw this, with a properly wordes sales pitch "free, no viruses, cool geek factor" etc, I think a "sale" would be easier.
I think you'll probably find that most people really don't want to be thought of as geeks. Sure, we've taken on the label with a kind of pride, but we're not most people.
That said, I agree with you about the GUI. One of the reasons I stopped using Linux (after having used it in some capacity for about 4 years) is that, to my eyes, XP is just prettier. Also, I was doing stuff (.net development, games playing) that I simply can't do under Linux, but at work, the eye candy was the deciding factor (OS X is not an option, before anyone mentions that).
I spend all day most days staring at my monitor; what's on it has to be aesthetically pleasing. Obviously, that's a highly subjective matter, but for me, right now, for me it's XP, not Linux.
No, but clicking on the appropriate shortcut icon to access the CD player is; as long as you have everything installed, then it Just Works. It's been a while since I used KDE (or Linux, for that matter), but that was a *seriously* cool feature.
How many people under 20 will remember a time before CDs? I seriously doubt any of them would have been buying music before CDs became widespread.
Neither do they seem to care that an album costs $18
I doubt if many of them have much to compare it to, other than DVDs (comparable) and console/PC games (much more expensive). Sure, I remember buying cassettes, but then I'm just barely under 30, not 20...
But apparently not enough to prevent them having to pull out of the free desktop market...
Somehow you're supposed to know that
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE -> SOFTWARE ->Autodesk ->
AutoCAD -> R14.0 -> ACAD-12:409 ->
Applications -> AecBase -> LOADCTRLS
is supposed to be set to 0x0000000d (13)
(as opposed to say 5)
I suggest you take that complaint up with Autodesk; MS can hardly be held responsible for how other companies store their apps' configuration settings, and the documentation they may or may not provide.
True, MS are just as bad in this respect, but surely you could have picked a better example? That's like saying that text config fles are bad, because of sendmail's one.
How so?
Not saying that it wouldn't be, I'd just be interested to hear your reasoning on that, is all.
Yes, I have, I'm using one right now (or at least, I should be ;-) ). JBuilder is plenty fast enough for me. No, I'm not trying to run it on an old P2 with 128meg of RAM, but that's not the sort of machine that people buy. Hell, 15 months ago I bought what I considered to be a bog-standard machine - P4 2.6Ghz with 512meg of RAM.
Maybe my expectations have been set too high (I'm a Java developer and gamer), but frankly, I don't think that's a "super machine". To me, a super machine would be at least 2-way SMP with a gig or two of RAM and large, fast disks.
Then a third-party vendor asks, "Hey, can we get in on this? Have our software phone home telling how the owner uses it. Then we can improve future versions." Annoying, but for a good cause, right?
They can do that now - the only thing that trusted computing could possibly add to this is the ability to prevent me from firewalling off the application or uninstalling it completely. Even now, if I firewall it, it can disable itself.
Then the data this third-party is getting shows that people are jumping ship on their application for one that costs less, and they cripple cross-functionality...and keep sending updates to your computer even if you patch it back the way you want it to be. But you don't get to say anything, because you clicked Yes on the EULA.
Oh, I get to say *plenty* about that, EULA or not. That's the sort of thing I'd be perfectly willing to challenge in court. No, I'd not be assured of winning, but at the same time, I'd not be assured of losing, either. That would be for the court to decide. No, I'd rather it not come to that, but I'd not just accept it meekly, either.
Merely accepting an agreement does not necessarily mean that if push came to shove I would have to be bound by it - a company cannot just put anything they like in it. As an extreme example, if the EULA stated that if I ever used a competing product, I would have to give them my daughter, there's no way in Hell that would ever stand up in court. Yes, that is a purposefully ridiculous example, but the point is that just because I say "yeah, sure, whatever" doesn't mean it'll actually happen. Between the obviously enforceable and the obviously unenforceable is a wide expanse of grey.
Well, if they don't have a licence to be running it at home, then frankly that's a *good* thing. Copyright infringement is copyright infringement, whether it's MS's copyright or some a GPLed project's copyright that's being infringed.
Of all the reasons to complain about the trusted computing intiative, lack of ability to infringe copyright is not the one to use.
But that's his point. On Windows, you download the appropriate setup program, and run it. That's it - there's no system tool to learn to use, you just run an executable.
Your suggestion is only really valid for updating the base OS install. I can't use KPackage to download and install an arbitrary third-party application. That's not something a system tool can sensibly be expected to do, unless you force all application developers to register their stuff with it.
You're happy enough to let Windows setup programs do all the hard work for you, why not do the same in Linux?
That's exactly what he wants. Your suggestion is akin to trying to use Windows Update to install third-party apps, though - it simply won't work.
Yes - for those ones that it runs. Right now, with games especially, that's a rather small subset of the whole.
The point stands - if you're buying a computer with a specific task or set of tasks in mind, you should buy the software that best enables you to perform those tasks, and that includes the OS. Right now, if playing games is on your list, then while you can certainly dual-boot, you definitely want Windows on there as well.
I watch videos (using Gentoo's win32 codecs ebuild)
Am I the only one to notice the irony in having to piggy-back on the Windows codecs to get basic stuff done in Linux? Not to mention that for some of those codecs at least, the legality of doing this is somewhat questionable, I believe. (I'm thinking of MS EULAs forbidding use of components without an appropriate Windows licence)
If anything, your comment helps to show just how far Linux does still have to come; you can't watch videos without using Windows-specific software. Not to knock the various Linux distros - they're all doing a superb job in less than ideal conditions. They're just not quite there yet, is all.
Speaking as a parent, this comment is not funny - it's bloody *true*!
Sorry - I thought you said *more incomprehensible*...
Fair use is a nice idea, but as a legal concept it doesn't necessarily exist.
I agree wholeheartedly that I should be allowed to rip any CD, cassette, LP, etc that I have bought to whatever format I like, in order to be able to listen to it more conveniently. Eg, I should be legally allowed to convert my entire CD collection to oggs to play on my nice, shiny new iRiver HP-120.
Unfortunately, I live in the UK, where doing so without explicit permission is copyright infringement. Oh sure, no-one is ever going to get sued for it, much less lose a court case over it, but that's not the point. I do not have explicit permission from the copyright holders to do what I have done, so I have broken the law.
Just ending up in a non-US court would guarantee nothing. Each country has its own version of the RIAA, and its own copyright laws, not all of which have any concept of fair use.