The seperation of an OS and a computer is ludacrious from a consumer standpoint. It's like seperating the OS of your cellphone and saying that the consumer did not "choose" the software/OS of the cellphone. The consumer chose Windows just as much as they chose the computer in which they purchased. You can purchase Apple computers, in which part of that choice is choosing OSX. What's different about the x86 hardware platform is that it's more open and therefore has many OS's that run on it, but that doesn't mean that a consumer needs to be aware of that.
The software, particularly the OS, is the interface to the consumer. That's a huge part of what they see when they go to make a purchase decision. The other factor is of course the hardware "specs" that they know little to nothing about (eg: p4 3.2Ghz, 1Gig RAM, etc.), but just make decisions based on "bigger is better". Nevertheless, you have to treat a computer as a whole product.
Finally, Windows95 was one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) _retail_ software launches in terms of sales, ever. So, people who already had computers made the choice to go spend an extra $90 to upgrade their machine.
On the contrary. If MS is giving away so much software to schools, and giving schools a _steep_ discount on their software, it's a slap in MS's face to be pirating their software in schools. I'd go after them too. If the school can't afford the software, don't pirate it, use a cheaper alternative. I have no problems if a school determines that Linux will work, I do have a problem when a school determines that MS is a better solution, and then pirates $10 copies of WinXP.
One could also render this attitude as, "we would benefit and enjoy the higher end solution, but we just can't afford that right now so we'll make do with this lower cost alternative."
I'm not making any claim about whether or not Linux is a good choice regardless of the purchase price, it just sounds like they care less about Free Software (as in speech) and more about getting a free lunch.
There's mulitple ways to render Brazil's attitude. Our speculations may be valid, but we shouldn't jump to and conclusions about those speculations.
You totally sidestepped the issue. The original post said that "Why can't MS with all of their billions do what OpenBSD does for free". Well, because OpenBSD doesn't do all that Windows has to do. This isn't about other BSD's (which vary widely). This isn't about mail servers. This is about the millions of desktops that have less security for the sake of consumer driven features and usability.
I'm not excusing MS's security problems, but I'm pointing out the fact that comparing OpenBSD to Windows is just rediculous, unless you're planning on using Windows for certain purposes (like a firewall).
While I'm normally trashing Marketing as the latest "must have feature" arrives in my bug tracker, the reality is, they interface with the customer and try to determine what they want. If it was what us Developers wanted, software design would be machine centered, not human centered. The problem with this is that the purpose of a machine is for a human, so they must be human centered. I don't care if you have a bulletproof OS if no one can use it. Just as you said, it's all the features _that consumers want_ that cause many of these security holes.
OpenBSD's motto: "Completely unusable, minimal hardware support, minimal software support, minimal pragmatic design for common usage".
Microsoft's motto: "Our customers want to do all of this fancy stuff with no inconvenient barriers... oops, we went too far with that, now we have to educate our customers as to why certain features do not exist in Outlook2003 as they did in previous versions, and convince them that security is important enough to lose those features."
There's a reason why OpenBSD isn't popular - because in the past, "Security Doesn't Sell". Now that security is becoming a limelight issue, customers are willing to sacrifice certain features and conveniences in the name of security. MS will stay on top because they are aggressively addressing these issues. OS X will remain strong because it's aggressively addressing these issues. OpenBSD will stay a small niche OS because, while it can be a great firewall, it won't suffice to do most of consumers other needs.
The almost ironic point with WMA, however, is that it allows choice. Most all players, DVD players, some CD players, and music stores support WMA. There's a lot of choice. The only area of choice that's limited is with your computers OS. With the iPod you have 2 major OS choices, but you don't have any hardware choices, and no music store choices (unless the store sells non-DRM'd audio).
4. What percentage of the owners of portable MP3 players are DJs that want to record their sets? DAT is lossless and is an industry standard, which makes it considerably better for recording your live sets.
You're ignoring his other points. There's probably a large percentage of users who have vinyl and cassets who would want to make backups of their media. Also, as consumer become more empowered with technology, they generally start do do more things with them. Go beyond the average consumer and you have audio engineers, producers, and DJ's as well. There's multiple markets to target with such a feature - why do you think even low end portable cassette players have audio inputs?
You are absolutely correct. For how much your setup cost I pay just for a single cart (I'm a DJ). The turntable costs an additional $300 minumum. It sounds great - I wouldn't say better than CD - but it's comparable.
Stream all images through a CGI/PHP/Response.BinaryWrite type method. Pass (in the PATH_INFO) a hashed key (for example) that represents that persons Session. You can then keep track of whether or not that session is downloading banners or not. If they use a program like Norton's, it will strip the IMG completely and therefore never hit your script. If the script is never hit, you can redirect the user to a page explaining that while they may not be interested in ads, you need them to support the site.
Sheeshe, maybe in these days of software patents I should patent this "technology".
If you're running Windows, and you have broadband, you need a firewall.
Windows XP -> Network Properties -> [Select Network Devices Properties] -> Advanced -> Internet Connection Firewall. You can choose "Settings" if you wish to specifically allow any incoming ports.
Those of us who dislike ads (probably 98% of the planet) will do our best not to see them.
First, I highly doubt the number is that high. If asked I'm sure most people would rather watch their favorite TV show with annoying commercials than have that TV show go off the air. Second, you make the choice not to visit the site if you think that their ads are too intrusive. However, if you block ads (other than potentially harmful ads like ActiveX or popups) then you are essentially stealing from the site. The site is, in good faith, giving you content for the price of viewing an ad. If people didn't click ads, then ads wouldn't exist. I do business with a website that makes a lot of money on ads, and their click-thru rates prove that people view ads. They spend a lot of money to provide people with content, assuming people accept the download of their advertisement. Again, why do you need to block ads? Why not just go to another site? Free loading is not the answer to a successful web.
Personally, I wish banners didn't exist either. But I'm also a realist. I would never pay for slashdot, but I use it all the time. I use their bandwidth and CPU cycles on a daily basis. Their ads have gotten bigger over the last two years, and while I don't like it, I appreciate the reasons why they had to do it. If so many people blocked ads that slashdot was a forced subscription site, I would stop visiting. Heck, if that was bound to happen I'd work on some OSS project to thwart ad blockers. I don't want you freeloaders taking away my "free" content!
The ubiquity of Apache has absolutely nothing on the ubiquity of Windows clients. If I wanted to write a virus I would much rather target IIS which will in turn be able to more easily infect Windows machines. It has never been about the number of servers, and I don't see why people make that distinction a valid argument.
Is Windows less secure than Linux? In certain areas (older versions of IIS, Outlook XP and older) it definitely is. However, if Linux was really more ubiquitous there would be more worms targetting Linux.
Well, C# doesn't have bytecode, but it's a similar concept.
The CPU does matter, but easily just as important is the GPU and the graphics API. Most of your graphics optimizations will happen through Microsoft's DirectX API, which will likely be very similar on the PC as well as the XBox (just like they are now). Then you just have to abstract your CPU optimizations which developers already do anyway (for SSE, SSE2, 3DNow!, and other instructions). Also, I'm sure that the next generation XBox will still be a Windows based system, so developing against the OS will be very similar to a PC. Finally, MS will probably provide tools for PC developers to make the switch virtually seemless. So, while a PPC based XBox may take a bit more development effort for PC ports, I wouldn't say it's a major setback at all.
Regarding backward compatibility with XBox titles, I agree with you completely. A 2Ghz G5 could very easily emulate a 733 Celron.
DJs are going to augment their pair of 1200s and huge collection of vinyl with some shitty little piece of plastic with a USB connector on it.
No, we won't. The number one most important aspect of any controller is just that, the "control". Quality of parts is so important when it comes to proper control. Quality is the reason why 1200's are so popular. They don't have fancy features and gizmos, they just work, and they work well. I've played with CD decks that have a similar "UI" as this USB deal, and they totally suck.
I think you're right about their target market: the "wedding DJ" types. Because really, spinning records is about having fun, and there is no spinning going on here. And really, you can get a good vinyl setup for under $1K, which is cheaper than any laptop/USB combo.
I stayed on 2K because everyone was saying this. I waited until SP1 and then upgraded my two machines to XP Pro. My laptop is always being thrashed as it's compiling and running my crappy code, while running IIS, Sql Server, VMWare, and Outlook 2003 Beta. My other machine (desktop) is used for my recording studio, as well as gaming (not a great combo but I don't have room for two desktops). Using Pro Tools, I've recorded 100's of hours of material, some sessions going as long as 3 hours. Niether machine has ever crashed. I've never lost work due to XP being unstable. Anecdotally people around me have similar success with XP. I don't buy the "it's a step backwards in stability" bit.
M$ was in fact found guilty of being an illegal monopoly in a court of law. Actually, they weren't. They were found guilty of abusing their monopoly status. The distinction is huge. Their monopoly has always been legit - people here are just bitter about it. Once MS had a monopoly they started leveraging that monopoly to shove out any potential competition via "strong-armed" agreements with OEM's. This is where MS was found guilty, and rightly so.
The result is that consumers are stuck with shoddy and overpriced software with few options to shop elsewhere.
My Dad, his brother, and his mom all love their Macs. You can buy many Linux distro's in major electronics stores. The choice is there, it's just that most people choose Windows. Remember the Windows95 MAD RUSH to stores when it was released? Microsoft did _NOT_ have a monopoly at that time. If Apple only came out with a quality OS like OSX sooner then they would have easily thwarted off the monopoly. Linux on the desktop was nowhere to be found at the time. BeOS had shoddy hardware support (up until it's "death"). The lack of _good_ competition was not Microsofts fault.
I have no guarantee that I'll be supported after ford goes out of business
Which is why hardly anyone would buy Daewoo's until GM picked them up. The same could be said for hardware as well. If you buy from a company that's not financially viable you could be stuck without support. I agree with you completely. This is the result of a bad business decision, not the result of using proprietary software.
Still, the bottom line is, you're working for corporations for _free_. You are increasing Microsoft's, IBM's, and Apple's profits and getting nothing in return. Sure, you maybe get experience contributing some ad-hoc code, but you can get much better experience doing the same for a company.
Serving 12,000 people doing what? This isn't QMail - many times Exchange is not just used for email. It's used for calendar / schedule collaboration, corporate messaging, email tracking, as well as the need to process and virus scan 100's of emails per day per user.
That's kuz the mshtml dll (which is essentially IE sans the UI) is consumed by iTunes and therefore the only checksum that you are seeing is the iTunes checksum... mshtml is part of it.
Slashdot Mirror
The seperation of an OS and a computer is ludacrious from a consumer standpoint. It's like seperating the OS of your cellphone and saying that the consumer did not "choose" the software/OS of the cellphone. The consumer chose Windows just as much as they chose the computer in which they purchased. You can purchase Apple computers, in which part of that choice is choosing OSX. What's different about the x86 hardware platform is that it's more open and therefore has many OS's that run on it, but that doesn't mean that a consumer needs to be aware of that.
The software, particularly the OS, is the interface to the consumer. That's a huge part of what they see when they go to make a purchase decision. The other factor is of course the hardware "specs" that they know little to nothing about (eg: p4 3.2Ghz, 1Gig RAM, etc.), but just make decisions based on "bigger is better". Nevertheless, you have to treat a computer as a whole product.
Finally, Windows95 was one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) _retail_ software launches in terms of sales, ever. So, people who already had computers made the choice to go spend an extra $90 to upgrade their machine.
On the contrary. If MS is giving away so much software to schools, and giving schools a _steep_ discount on their software, it's a slap in MS's face to be pirating their software in schools. I'd go after them too. If the school can't afford the software, don't pirate it, use a cheaper alternative. I have no problems if a school determines that Linux will work, I do have a problem when a school determines that MS is a better solution, and then pirates $10 copies of WinXP.
One could also render this attitude as, "we would benefit and enjoy the higher end solution, but we just can't afford that right now so we'll make do with this lower cost alternative."
I'm not making any claim about whether or not Linux is a good choice regardless of the purchase price, it just sounds like they care less about Free Software (as in speech) and more about getting a free lunch.
There's mulitple ways to render Brazil's attitude. Our speculations may be valid, but we shouldn't jump to and conclusions about those speculations.
You totally sidestepped the issue. The original post said that "Why can't MS with all of their billions do what OpenBSD does for free". Well, because OpenBSD doesn't do all that Windows has to do. This isn't about other BSD's (which vary widely). This isn't about mail servers. This is about the millions of desktops that have less security for the sake of consumer driven features and usability.
I'm not excusing MS's security problems, but I'm pointing out the fact that comparing OpenBSD to Windows is just rediculous, unless you're planning on using Windows for certain purposes (like a firewall).
While I'm normally trashing Marketing as the latest "must have feature" arrives in my bug tracker, the reality is, they interface with the customer and try to determine what they want. If it was what us Developers wanted, software design would be machine centered, not human centered. The problem with this is that the purpose of a machine is for a human, so they must be human centered. I don't care if you have a bulletproof OS if no one can use it. Just as you said, it's all the features _that consumers want_ that cause many of these security holes.
More like,
OpenBSD's motto: "Completely unusable, minimal hardware support, minimal software support, minimal pragmatic design for common usage".
Microsoft's motto: "Our customers want to do all of this fancy stuff with no inconvenient barriers... oops, we went too far with that, now we have to educate our customers as to why certain features do not exist in Outlook2003 as they did in previous versions, and convince them that security is important enough to lose those features."
There's a reason why OpenBSD isn't popular - because in the past, "Security Doesn't Sell". Now that security is becoming a limelight issue, customers are willing to sacrifice certain features and conveniences in the name of security. MS will stay on top because they are aggressively addressing these issues. OS X will remain strong because it's aggressively addressing these issues. OpenBSD will stay a small niche OS because, while it can be a great firewall, it won't suffice to do most of consumers other needs.
The almost ironic point with WMA, however, is that it allows choice. Most all players, DVD players, some CD players, and music stores support WMA. There's a lot of choice. The only area of choice that's limited is with your computers OS. With the iPod you have 2 major OS choices, but you don't have any hardware choices, and no music store choices (unless the store sells non-DRM'd audio).
4. What percentage of the owners of portable MP3 players are DJs that want to record their sets? DAT is lossless and is an industry standard, which makes it considerably better for recording your live sets.
You're ignoring his other points. There's probably a large percentage of users who have vinyl and cassets who would want to make backups of their media. Also, as consumer become more empowered with technology, they generally start do do more things with them. Go beyond the average consumer and you have audio engineers, producers, and DJ's as well. There's multiple markets to target with such a feature - why do you think even low end portable cassette players have audio inputs?
Yup, Technics 1200 M3D's with Ortofon DJ S cart's.
You are absolutely correct. For how much your setup cost I pay just for a single cart (I'm a DJ). The turntable costs an additional $300 minumum. It sounds great - I wouldn't say better than CD - but it's comparable.
One trick to add:
Stream all images through a CGI/PHP/Response.BinaryWrite type method. Pass (in the PATH_INFO) a hashed key (for example) that represents that persons Session. You can then keep track of whether or not that session is downloading banners or not. If they use a program like Norton's, it will strip the IMG completely and therefore never hit your script. If the script is never hit, you can redirect the user to a page explaining that while they may not be interested in ads, you need them to support the site.
Sheeshe, maybe in these days of software patents I should patent this "technology".
If you're running Windows, and you have broadband, you need a firewall.
Windows XP -> Network Properties -> [Select Network Devices Properties] -> Advanced -> Internet Connection Firewall. You can choose "Settings" if you wish to specifically allow any incoming ports.
Those of us who dislike ads (probably 98% of the planet) will do our best not to see them.
First, I highly doubt the number is that high. If asked I'm sure most people would rather watch their favorite TV show with annoying commercials than have that TV show go off the air. Second, you make the choice not to visit the site if you think that their ads are too intrusive. However, if you block ads (other than potentially harmful ads like ActiveX or popups) then you are essentially stealing from the site. The site is, in good faith, giving you content for the price of viewing an ad. If people didn't click ads, then ads wouldn't exist. I do business with a website that makes a lot of money on ads, and their click-thru rates prove that people view ads. They spend a lot of money to provide people with content, assuming people accept the download of their advertisement. Again, why do you need to block ads? Why not just go to another site? Free loading is not the answer to a successful web.
Personally, I wish banners didn't exist either. But I'm also a realist. I would never pay for slashdot, but I use it all the time. I use their bandwidth and CPU cycles on a daily basis. Their ads have gotten bigger over the last two years, and while I don't like it, I appreciate the reasons why they had to do it. If so many people blocked ads that slashdot was a forced subscription site, I would stop visiting. Heck, if that was bound to happen I'd work on some OSS project to thwart ad blockers. I don't want you freeloaders taking away my "free" content!
The ubiquity of Apache has absolutely nothing on the ubiquity of Windows clients. If I wanted to write a virus I would much rather target IIS which will in turn be able to more easily infect Windows machines. It has never been about the number of servers, and I don't see why people make that distinction a valid argument.
Is Windows less secure than Linux? In certain areas (older versions of IIS, Outlook XP and older) it definitely is. However, if Linux was really more ubiquitous there would be more worms targetting Linux.
Well, C# doesn't have bytecode, but it's a similar concept.
The CPU does matter, but easily just as important is the GPU and the graphics API. Most of your graphics optimizations will happen through Microsoft's DirectX API, which will likely be very similar on the PC as well as the XBox (just like they are now). Then you just have to abstract your CPU optimizations which developers already do anyway (for SSE, SSE2, 3DNow!, and other instructions). Also, I'm sure that the next generation XBox will still be a Windows based system, so developing against the OS will be very similar to a PC. Finally, MS will probably provide tools for PC developers to make the switch virtually seemless. So, while a PPC based XBox may take a bit more development effort for PC ports, I wouldn't say it's a major setback at all.
Regarding backward compatibility with XBox titles, I agree with you completely. A 2Ghz G5 could very easily emulate a 733 Celron.
DJs are going to augment their pair of 1200s and huge collection of vinyl with some shitty little piece of plastic with a USB connector on it.
No, we won't. The number one most important aspect of any controller is just that, the "control". Quality of parts is so important when it comes to proper control. Quality is the reason why 1200's are so popular. They don't have fancy features and gizmos, they just work, and they work well. I've played with CD decks that have a similar "UI" as this USB deal, and they totally suck.
I think you're right about their target market: the "wedding DJ" types. Because really, spinning records is about having fun, and there is no spinning going on here. And really, you can get a good vinyl setup for under $1K, which is cheaper than any laptop/USB combo.
whereas XP can be slow and can be buggy
I stayed on 2K because everyone was saying this. I waited until SP1 and then upgraded my two machines to XP Pro. My laptop is always being thrashed as it's compiling and running my crappy code, while running IIS, Sql Server, VMWare, and Outlook 2003 Beta. My other machine (desktop) is used for my recording studio, as well as gaming (not a great combo but I don't have room for two desktops). Using Pro Tools, I've recorded 100's of hours of material, some sessions going as long as 3 hours. Niether machine has ever crashed. I've never lost work due to XP being unstable. Anecdotally people around me have similar success with XP. I don't buy the "it's a step backwards in stability" bit.
M$ was in fact found guilty of being an illegal monopoly in a court of law.
Actually, they weren't. They were found guilty of abusing their monopoly status. The distinction is huge. Their monopoly has always been legit - people here are just bitter about it. Once MS had a monopoly they started leveraging that monopoly to shove out any potential competition via "strong-armed" agreements with OEM's. This is where MS was found guilty, and rightly so.
The result is that consumers are stuck with shoddy and overpriced software with few options to shop elsewhere.
My Dad, his brother, and his mom all love their Macs. You can buy many Linux distro's in major electronics stores. The choice is there, it's just that most people choose Windows. Remember the Windows95 MAD RUSH to stores when it was released? Microsoft did _NOT_ have a monopoly at that time. If Apple only came out with a quality OS like OSX sooner then they would have easily thwarted off the monopoly. Linux on the desktop was nowhere to be found at the time. BeOS had shoddy hardware support (up until it's "death"). The lack of _good_ competition was not Microsofts fault.
Basically, is Windows true market value $200?
No, it's about $30 to the average Dell user, and no more than $90 for even the smallest mom and pop PC shop.
It doesn't matter. Sun owns Java. They own the spec. They can shut it down anytime they want.
I have no guarantee that I'll be supported after ford goes out of business
Which is why hardly anyone would buy Daewoo's until GM picked them up. The same could be said for hardware as well. If you buy from a company that's not financially viable you could be stuck without support. I agree with you completely. This is the result of a bad business decision, not the result of using proprietary software.
Still, the bottom line is, you're working for corporations for _free_. You are increasing Microsoft's, IBM's, and Apple's profits and getting nothing in return. Sure, you maybe get experience contributing some ad-hoc code, but you can get much better experience doing the same for a company.
Serving 12,000 people doing what? This isn't QMail - many times Exchange is not just used for email. It's used for calendar / schedule collaboration, corporate messaging, email tracking, as well as the need to process and virus scan 100's of emails per day per user.
Because IE is a part of Windows, it's no longer a seperate product. And I've verified it's IE5, not 6.
That's kuz the mshtml dll (which is essentially IE sans the UI) is consumed by iTunes and therefore the only checksum that you are seeing is the iTunes checksum... mshtml is part of it.