It's really sad that Microsoft screwed up so badly with the whole UI formerly known as Metro. And the licensing. And, well, pretty much everything beyond the core OS.
I bought the upgrade as a cheap way to get the latest Windows running on my MBP, but the installation was an amazing hassle. They don't tell you up front that you're not allowed to do a clean install, so you have to run through registry hoops and calls to the Microsoft Licensing hotline thingy just to get your legal copy of windows working properly.
Once I got it installed, I found a start menu replacement. I ended up spending the 5 bucks for Start8 by Stardock cause it's head and shoulders better than the freely available ones. It lets you bypass Metro completely unless you specifically want to use it, and from that point on I've actually really liked Windows 8. It's wonderfully snappy, and it's understated window dressing is a refreshing change from the kaleidoscopic orgy of previous versions of Windows.
For the cheap upgrade price, I'm not TOO upset, but there is no way in hell I would put up with this crap if I was paying full price. I'd sooner do without.
Luxury! When I was your age I had to walk (without shoes) to a canyon, and bang two rocks together to make my zeros and ones. I'd do the calculations by timing my bangs so that the resulting constructive and destructive interference between the different echos would act as a full adder!
I'm having difficulty understanding why people insist on using Ruby on Rails, especially for projects where their goal is high performance OLTP system.
Twitter was an incredibly high-profile failure, where twitter had to rewrite their entire backend in something else (Java I think? I can't remember now).
If you want to make a scalable application, then use a platform known to be capable of handling such things. What next? Writing code for an embedded system using J2EE?
One thing that is not getting nearly the press it deserves, is that Microsoft changed the licensing on the desktop versions of Office. Unless previous versions, Office is no longer transferrable. So if you ever upgrade your computer, you have to buy a new copy of Office otherwise you are out of compliance.
I was actually really looking forward to trying Office 2013, but that one change alone makes it a dealbreaker.
Apple gets a lot of flak for 'letting it happen', but Apple is the only company I know of that is actively trying to do something about it.
If this is happening to Apple, you KNOW it's happening to everyone else. And I have yet to hear a single report of Samsung doing a similar thing to what Apple is doing now.
I have to say I agree. We need to stop coddling people who do mindblowingly stupid things.
Let them post their private keys. Let them learn the hard way what happens.
Same with people who steady a scalding cup of coffee by putting it between their legs, while driving no less.
I don't even WANT to know what prompted the warning label on a toilet brush that stated, "Not to be used for personal hygiene".
Bring back lawn darts, kinder eggs and buckyballs, remove the warning labels from everything, and add a law that prevents people from being allowed to sue after doing something dumb (where 'dumb' is decided on by a jury of peers) and let the problem sort itself out.
What do you mean, "Oh wait."? They *did*. And they managed to overwhelmingly dominate the market for many years. Once they destroyed Netscape there was no decent alternative for quite a while until zombie Netscape rose up again as Firefox.
Or 4, they think they can get away with screwing everyone else and taking control of a potentially very lucrative market, like they did with: * Internet Explorer and their custom implementations of HTML/CSS * Their custom windows-only version of Java * OpenXML and their subverting an entire standards body to get it ratified as a 'Standard' just so they could go after special government contracts requiring an open format, without having to give up control of the office suite space. * Custom extensions to LDAP to hinder interoperability with Active Directory. * Countless other things that anyone could find doing a few searches of Microsoft's history.
There's a reason Microsoft's catch phrase is "Embrace. Extend. Extinguish." and it's sad that, like an abused spouse, people keep giving Microsoft another chance because, "They will do better this time."
How about the REAL reason Microsoft went their own way?
Because they want to control the plan form so that if they successfully gain traction, they can start locking everyone else out. Just like they do with everything else.
Ignoring the fact that even most US 'liberals' are more conservative than 'conservatives' in other countries, your choice of examples are downright laughable.
You complain about about liberals denying you your rightful soft drink. Well I complain about conservatives who deny women control over their own bodies. You complain about liberals wanting to ban your precious guns. I complain about conservatives going to other countries like Uganda and doing everything they can to incite the genocide of anyone even suspected of being queer, while in the homeland, you send those same queers to brainwashing camps or gang up and beat them to death.
It was also conservatives that tore apart habeas corpus, permitting the government to throw you in jail indefinitely and seize your property. All they have to do is declare you an 'enemy combatant', for whatever reason they feel like.
And I'm still trying to figure out how you managed to twist the discussion into an argument of religion vs liberals, as if being a liberal was some kind of opposite to religion.
You are using the term 'attack' remarkably loosely. Did I tell him that he's wrong and that he give up? Did I tell him to shut up? I'm looking at my post and I can't find any such thing. I fail to see how what I said can be construed as an attack on their aspirations. All I said was that reality isn't straight forward, and I will point out that you have not countered that statement.
If someone genuinely wanted to do something about it, then a random comment on an internet board isn't going to do anything to stop them. All your post does is prove that you like wasting people's time by creating storms in teacups, and that you are incapable of seeing the forest from the trees.
I'm sorry, but we're talking about serious hardball here. Do I have to remind you that someone is DEAD because of what's happened? We're talking about powerful people that have proven that they have the ability and the will to completely destroy other people's lives for personal ambition.
And you're worried about me hurting someone's feelings? If someone is so weak that they are going to be dissuaded from doing something as important as fighting a power that large, because of one random person's internet comment, then said person is not capable of taking on the challenge to begin with because they can't be relied upon to stand up to the least bit of pressure. And let me tell you, the pressure will be a LOT more than a random internet comment.
Maybe instead of going around trying to act all high and mighty from your arm chair, you actually take active part in some sort of political campaign to do something about this?
If course I share the grandparents aspirations. However, aspiration without action accomplishes nothing, and 99% of the people saying, "X should not be so!" or "We should be doing Y" is, to steal a quote, as effective as solving an algebra equation by chewing bubble gum.
And this ignores the fact that the various Shoulds are usually incredibly simplistic and naive views that completely break down the moment you start to dig at them. It is pointless to Should anything that is more complex than a fundamentally basic human behaviour, because it just doesn't work.
eg: People should listen to each other more. That's all well and good until you try to apply that to a janitor with zero scientific learning, trying to tell you their theories about particle physics. Why should I waste my time listening when he clearly doesn't know what he's talking about?
There is nothing in this world that can be solved by something as simple as a Should. If people see some kind of problem that they genuinely want to fix, then they need to get off their rear and come up with a plan of action, and follow through. Or find someone else who already has such a plan, and help them out.
Sitting in front of a computer, or a beer glass for that matter, and proclaiming that "This shouldn't be so!" is just ineffectual whining. Any smugness that you interpret from my post is a projection on your part, because I feel no smugness in pointing out how ineffectual the parent is. If people feel upset because I'm pouring cold water over their navel-gazing-on-a-soap-box, that's their problem. Not mine.
If there arn't LEDs spread throughout the interconnect that flash randomly during operation, then how am I supposed to accept that this is the future in server technology?
The word 'should' is such a wonderful word. There are lots of things that should and should not be done. Unfortunately, reality doesn't always play out that way.
I think the scope of the problem is bigger and more complex than just companies taking responsibility.
The problem is that customers who buy software are not *willing* to pay for that level of responsibility. If software was designed and created to the same level of rigour as say, an aircraft, then it would *cost* a hell of a lot more than it does now.
And you know what will happen then? The customers will go to someone who can provide the software for cheaper. We have already seen software being outsourced to other countries because companies try to squeeze every last penny, even when they know full well that the software they are going to get will be crap. That will just get worse.
So forcing software companies to be like engineering firms is only half the problem. There also needs to be laws in place that force customers to only purchase from properly regulated firms, and that failing to do so moves the liability to *them* when the software fails.
Slashdot Mirror
That was exactly the behaviour I was expecting. And that apparently doesn't happen anymore.
It's really sad that Microsoft screwed up so badly with the whole UI formerly known as Metro. And the licensing. And, well, pretty much everything beyond the core OS.
I bought the upgrade as a cheap way to get the latest Windows running on my MBP, but the installation was an amazing hassle. They don't tell you up front that you're not allowed to do a clean install, so you have to run through registry hoops and calls to the Microsoft Licensing hotline thingy just to get your legal copy of windows working properly.
Once I got it installed, I found a start menu replacement. I ended up spending the 5 bucks for Start8 by Stardock cause it's head and shoulders better than the freely available ones. It lets you bypass Metro completely unless you specifically want to use it, and from that point on I've actually really liked Windows 8. It's wonderfully snappy, and it's understated window dressing is a refreshing change from the kaleidoscopic orgy of previous versions of Windows.
For the cheap upgrade price, I'm not TOO upset, but there is no way in hell I would put up with this crap if I was paying full price. I'd sooner do without.
Your data was spread across the 4 winds as soon as you started using Facebook.
The only "problem" here is that your data has now been around the globe without Facebook getting to monetize the transaction.
It's a shame that he's leaving. He was the perfect figurehead for the Catholic Church because he clearly and visibly embodied it's principles.
I concede to you, sir. :)
Luxury! When I was your age I had to walk (without shoes) to a canyon, and bang two rocks together to make my zeros and ones. I'd do the calculations by timing my bangs so that the resulting constructive and destructive interference between the different echos would act as a full adder!
I'm having difficulty understanding why people insist on using Ruby on Rails, especially for projects where their goal is high performance OLTP system.
Twitter was an incredibly high-profile failure, where twitter had to rewrite their entire backend in something else (Java I think? I can't remember now).
If you want to make a scalable application, then use a platform known to be capable of handling such things. What next? Writing code for an embedded system using J2EE?
At least they're using postgres for the database.
How many municipalities have been sued into oblivion by incumbents who cried "unfair competition"?
Bob, I'd like to bid.... *looks over* I'd like to bid... 205!
And now *I've* been modded troll. Wow, the Microsoft shills are out in force today.
One thing that is not getting nearly the press it deserves, is that Microsoft changed the licensing on the desktop versions of Office. Unless previous versions, Office is no longer transferrable. So if you ever upgrade your computer, you have to buy a new copy of Office otherwise you are out of compliance.
I was actually really looking forward to trying Office 2013, but that one change alone makes it a dealbreaker.
http://office-watch.com/t/n.aspx?a=1784
How is this modded Informative? The parent is clearly making a joke at the Surface's expense. iOS doesn't require even remotely that much space.
If you're gonna troll for Microsoft, can you at least TRY to not be so pathetically transparent?
Apple gets a lot of flak for 'letting it happen', but Apple is the only company I know of that is actively trying to do something about it.
If this is happening to Apple, you KNOW it's happening to everyone else. And I have yet to hear a single report of Samsung doing a similar thing to what Apple is doing now.
I have to say I agree. We need to stop coddling people who do mindblowingly stupid things.
Let them post their private keys. Let them learn the hard way what happens.
Same with people who steady a scalding cup of coffee by putting it between their legs, while driving no less.
I don't even WANT to know what prompted the warning label on a toilet brush that stated, "Not to be used for personal hygiene".
Bring back lawn darts, kinder eggs and buckyballs, remove the warning labels from everything, and add a law that prevents people from being allowed to sue after doing something dumb (where 'dumb' is decided on by a jury of peers) and let the problem sort itself out.
What do you mean, "Oh wait."? They *did*. And they managed to overwhelmingly dominate the market for many years. Once they destroyed Netscape there was no decent alternative for quite a while until zombie Netscape rose up again as Firefox.
That's all well and good, but what will happen when Hawking dictates a formula that involves division?
Or 4, they think they can get away with screwing everyone else and taking control of a potentially very lucrative market, like they did with:
* Internet Explorer and their custom implementations of HTML/CSS
* Their custom windows-only version of Java
* OpenXML and their subverting an entire standards body to get it ratified as a 'Standard' just so they could go after special government contracts requiring an open format, without having to give up control of the office suite space.
* Custom extensions to LDAP to hinder interoperability with Active Directory.
* Countless other things that anyone could find doing a few searches of Microsoft's history.
There's a reason Microsoft's catch phrase is "Embrace. Extend. Extinguish." and it's sad that, like an abused spouse, people keep giving Microsoft another chance because, "They will do better this time."
How about the REAL reason Microsoft went their own way?
Because they want to control the plan form so that if they successfully gain traction, they can start locking everyone else out. Just like they do with everything else.
LOL!
Ignoring the fact that even most US 'liberals' are more conservative than 'conservatives' in other countries, your choice of examples are downright laughable.
You complain about about liberals denying you your rightful soft drink. Well I complain about conservatives who deny women control over their own bodies.
You complain about liberals wanting to ban your precious guns. I complain about conservatives going to other countries like Uganda and doing everything they can to incite the genocide of anyone even suspected of being queer, while in the homeland, you send those same queers to brainwashing camps or gang up and beat them to death.
It was also conservatives that tore apart habeas corpus, permitting the government to throw you in jail indefinitely and seize your property. All they have to do is declare you an 'enemy combatant', for whatever reason they feel like.
And I'm still trying to figure out how you managed to twist the discussion into an argument of religion vs liberals, as if being a liberal was some kind of opposite to religion.
Seriously?
You are using the term 'attack' remarkably loosely. Did I tell him that he's wrong and that he give up? Did I tell him to shut up? I'm looking at my post and I can't find any such thing. I fail to see how what I said can be construed as an attack on their aspirations. All I said was that reality isn't straight forward, and I will point out that you have not countered that statement.
If someone genuinely wanted to do something about it, then a random comment on an internet board isn't going to do anything to stop them. All your post does is prove that you like wasting people's time by creating storms in teacups, and that you are incapable of seeing the forest from the trees.
I'm sorry, but we're talking about serious hardball here. Do I have to remind you that someone is DEAD because of what's happened? We're talking about powerful people that have proven that they have the ability and the will to completely destroy other people's lives for personal ambition.
And you're worried about me hurting someone's feelings? If someone is so weak that they are going to be dissuaded from doing something as important as fighting a power that large, because of one random person's internet comment, then said person is not capable of taking on the challenge to begin with because they can't be relied upon to stand up to the least bit of pressure. And let me tell you, the pressure will be a LOT more than a random internet comment.
Maybe instead of going around trying to act all high and mighty from your arm chair, you actually take active part in some sort of political campaign to do something about this?
If course I share the grandparents aspirations. However, aspiration without action accomplishes nothing, and 99% of the people saying, "X should not be so!" or "We should be doing Y" is, to steal a quote, as effective as solving an algebra equation by chewing bubble gum.
And this ignores the fact that the various Shoulds are usually incredibly simplistic and naive views that completely break down the moment you start to dig at them. It is pointless to Should anything that is more complex than a fundamentally basic human behaviour, because it just doesn't work.
eg: People should listen to each other more. That's all well and good until you try to apply that to a janitor with zero scientific learning, trying to tell you their theories about particle physics. Why should I waste my time listening when he clearly doesn't know what he's talking about?
There is nothing in this world that can be solved by something as simple as a Should. If people see some kind of problem that they genuinely want to fix, then they need to get off their rear and come up with a plan of action, and follow through. Or find someone else who already has such a plan, and help them out.
Sitting in front of a computer, or a beer glass for that matter, and proclaiming that "This shouldn't be so!" is just ineffectual whining. Any smugness that you interpret from my post is a projection on your part, because I feel no smugness in pointing out how ineffectual the parent is. If people feel upset because I'm pouring cold water over their navel-gazing-on-a-soap-box, that's their problem. Not mine.
If there arn't LEDs spread throughout the interconnect that flash randomly during operation, then how am I supposed to accept that this is the future in server technology?
The word 'should' is such a wonderful word. There are lots of things that should and should not be done. Unfortunately, reality doesn't always play out that way.
I think the scope of the problem is bigger and more complex than just companies taking responsibility.
The problem is that customers who buy software are not *willing* to pay for that level of responsibility. If software was designed and created to the same level of rigour as say, an aircraft, then it would *cost* a hell of a lot more than it does now.
And you know what will happen then? The customers will go to someone who can provide the software for cheaper. We have already seen software being outsourced to other countries because companies try to squeeze every last penny, even when they know full well that the software they are going to get will be crap. That will just get worse.
So forcing software companies to be like engineering firms is only half the problem. There also needs to be laws in place that force customers to only purchase from properly regulated firms, and that failing to do so moves the liability to *them* when the software fails.
I hope you're proud of yourselves. How does it feel to be accessories to completely unnecessary deaths?