On Windows it is a system service off by default that applications can use. On OSX it is a system on by default that applications can pass additional information to. Big big difference.
The power management changes are genuinely a Big Deal this time around. They've learned a lot from mobile. Be interesting to see if MS tries something similar in 8.2.
They can't. Many of the power improvements that Apple has done break compatibility badly. You have to be willing to force applications to upgrade like Apple does to do what they've done in the same way. Microsoft is going to have to approach the problem via a much more complex and lengthy process.
Verifiability was interpreted differently then. There was verifiability relative to the material. A game walkthrough had lower standards than articles about a famous battle.
As for high school kids writing about his friends. Come on, you know that's not what I meant. Pastors writing about their denomination's history. Mayors writing about their towns. Franchise family members writing about the history of the franchise.
No it doesn't want those mostly. It doesn't privilege experts. NuPedia or later http://en.citizendium.org/ make use of experts. The experts that are willing to deal with non-experts on an equal basis for an extended conversation are cranks. The way to handle cranks is to have multiple cranks and use them to achieve balance.
When wikipedia equated quantity with quality it was a fun site to edit and created tons of articles and attracted contributors. When they started worrying about overly much about being anything more than the best first site to hit, they stopped. This article is about what the quality moves so far have done.
Copyright violations used to often be handled more appropriately. I've had images for which I owned copyright deleted, that wouldn't have happened earlier. I was frequently in 2006, 7... able to get copyright owners to license to Wikipedia. Those are all gone. Today licensed is not acceptable. The good thing is the images have a uniform license, the GFDL (with or without disclaimers) and the CC-BY-SA. The bad thing is there are far fewer images.
As for self-promotion. Self-promotion was often the start of many good articles. Clean out the unreferenced material if it is a good article and move on.
As for vaguely inappropriate that's often the big problem. The assumption back then was that everything was appropriate unless there was a very good reason not to have it.
Editors are self appointed. You just get an account, find articles you are interested in you think you can help, and start.
Wikipedia has in theory a bottom up system and in practice a top down one. The tension drives a lot of the problem. It is hard to describe if you have never contributed, but if you try you will within 6 months get bit hard.
You need to upgrade to have a touchscreen or a tablet pad, likely a touchpad for mouse and proper hinging on a laptop. Linux is fine for older hardware. As for UEFI and getting into the BIOS. That's not an OS function that's a hardware / administration function.
As for security problems I doubt there was much shift from Windows 7 to Windows 8. If you want a much more secure OS try a capabilities based one, Linux is really not a great alternative since is also fundamentally permissions based.
Lotus Notes was an amazing product. The problem is that Lotus Notes was not a competitor to Exchange but rather a platform for company internal databases which also did email. Notes supported properly requires a Notes programming group (i.e. 1/2 dozen + dedicated developers) and an administrative team. Under those conditions Notes is fantastic. Treat Notes like Exchange and have 1 guy or worse part of 1 guy and it sucks.
Ribbon wasn't dumbing down the interface it was adding features. Context sensitive menus allows for more items and greater degrees of embedding than context unaware menus. This is more obvious if you are using add-ons beyond the normal base functionality.
The only way I can see to get out of this mess is to specify a common document interchange format, and force Microsoft to support it as their default file format.
OpenSuite might be close enough to OpenOffice to get a trademark violation. Given that it would Oracle suing them... I'd go for a name a bit further away.
It might very well work better. Assuming the order for PCs is similar to what happened on Unix then we would expect a progression (each step taking many years) of:
1) Mostly commercial software on commercial OSes 2) Mostly free software on commercial OSes 3) Mostly free software on free OSes
To shift from 2 to 3 requires the makers of the remaining commercial applications to support the shift in operating systems. With Microsoft making lots of money on their server products (especially on enterprise) and Office products they might be willing to be less protective of their desktop OS if they can get more from these other revenue sources. Windows in the cloud makes possible a shift from 2 to 3 the same way that SCO based Unix solutions creating Linux variants made possible a shift for the Unix community in the 1990s and early 2000s.
Under Ballmer Microsoft released a variety of OSes and had an explosion in sales of their enterprise products. Ballmer focused on enterprise not consumers during most of his time as CEO which is why people here think he couldn't do anything.
Windows 8 will be fine. It never really should have been run on Windows 7 hardware. It works well on the right hardware, and the hardware basis needs to change. The purpose of Windows 8 is to provide an operating system that makes use of next generation hardware. Everyone knows the marketshare for Windows 7 hardware is still much larger. So what would marketshare be now but people using the wrong operating system.
No CoS is not free to do what commercial entities do with their profits. There are much stricter regulations on how they pay their staff wages and stricter regulations on how they reinvest. Essentially the money has to be kept within the church system or used to pay reasonable wages.
The no stock is a big one, that means there are no owners pulling huge profits out (at least legally). That is what it means to be a church vs. say a for profit training center.
It is far too advanced for middle management. Middle management doesn't need things like bibliographic support, long complex multi author change tracking, styles, complex tab adjustments, multiple keyboards for foreign languages.... Those are features for people who spend much more time authoring documents than middle management.
I think you have a bunch of axis going on here at the same time. 1) Open source tools vs. closed source 2) General use vs. specialized 3) WYSIWYM vs. WYSIWYG editing.
Let's start with (3). I generally like WYSIWYM more than WYSIWYG environments. That being said WYSIWYG is very useful for content where consistency doesn't matter as much. While there are WYSIWYM systems for presentations but they only really work for data publishing better than WYSIWYG. I think a fairer comparison on this axis might be LyX vs. Word or FrameMarker vs. Word. Going up something like higher end composition engines vs. something like InDesign.
Then there is general use vs specialized. LaTeX is optimized for text with equations which is specialized. Fountain is for screenplays. That's not the same as a product like Word which is all purpose.
Finally open source vs. closed source is a complicating factor. When we consider Word do we consider all the myriad additional cost extensions, for example SharePoint or just the core product? For OpenSource do we consider the entire platform and how these components work together? More importantly closed vs. open goes beyond editing to broader computing issues.
I'll bite. The current people spending like crazy won't even talk about responsible spending, they won't even talk.
What would be your suggestion to make them at least listen to options to become responsible? In the last 5 years, government shutdown or threat of shutdown has been the only way to reduce any spending at all, it was called the sequestor.
Of course they will. We know that with the grand bargain talks in 2011. Their have been numerous proposals put forth by Democrats to shift and decrease spending, especially in areas of corporate welfare. Obamacare itself was a large attack on private and public spending, the problem of the cost curve. You'll remember that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan tried to run for office against the savings from it.
The Republicans like to point to this. But the way a budget into the Senate is for it to be a House Budget not a House Republican conference budget. That means it passes with wide bipartisan support not narrow partisan support. Which means negotiating with the committee co-chairs and Nancy Pelosi.
If that were happening I'd be onboard blaming Harry Reid. Otherwise it is just Republicans wondering why Democrats won't pass the Republican budget. Why would they?
Why do you think the Obamacare web site doesn't work? On fucking purpose, so that masses of idiots will continue to believe in the narrative that everyone and their mom wants this fucking bullshit and it's only a "tiny minority" of "anarchists" and "extremists" which disagrees.
Slashdot Mirror
On Windows it is a system service off by default that applications can use. On OSX it is a system on by default that applications can pass additional information to. Big big difference.
They can't. Many of the power improvements that Apple has done break compatibility badly. You have to be willing to force applications to upgrade like Apple does to do what they've done in the same way. Microsoft is going to have to approach the problem via a much more complex and lengthy process.
Terrific reply. Couldn't agree more, especially the last line.
Verifiability was interpreted differently then. There was verifiability relative to the material. A game walkthrough had lower standards than articles about a famous battle.
As for high school kids writing about his friends. Come on, you know that's not what I meant. Pastors writing about their denomination's history. Mayors writing about their towns. Franchise family members writing about the history of the franchise.
No it doesn't want those mostly. It doesn't privilege experts. NuPedia or later http://en.citizendium.org/ make use of experts. The experts that are willing to deal with non-experts on an equal basis for an extended conversation are cranks. The way to handle cranks is to have multiple cranks and use them to achieve balance.
When wikipedia equated quantity with quality it was a fun site to edit and created tons of articles and attracted contributors. When they started worrying about overly much about being anything more than the best first site to hit, they stopped. This article is about what the quality moves so far have done.
You can stop them from being annoying. Many policies like preventing article forks forced people who didn't like together to work together.
Copyright violations used to often be handled more appropriately. I've had images for which I owned copyright deleted, that wouldn't have happened earlier. I was frequently in 2006, 7... able to get copyright owners to license to Wikipedia. Those are all gone. Today licensed is not acceptable. The good thing is the images have a uniform license, the GFDL (with or without disclaimers) and the CC-BY-SA. The bad thing is there are far fewer images.
As for self-promotion. Self-promotion was often the start of many good articles. Clean out the unreferenced material if it is a good article and move on.
As for vaguely inappropriate that's often the big problem. The assumption back then was that everything was appropriate unless there was a very good reason not to have it.
Editors are self appointed. You just get an account, find articles you are interested in you think you can help, and start.
Wikipedia has in theory a bottom up system and in practice a top down one. The tension drives a lot of the problem. It is hard to describe if you have never contributed, but if you try you will within 6 months get bit hard.
You need to upgrade to have a touchscreen or a tablet pad, likely a touchpad for mouse and proper hinging on a laptop. Linux is fine for older hardware. As for UEFI and getting into the BIOS. That's not an OS function that's a hardware / administration function.
As for security problems I doubt there was much shift from Windows 7 to Windows 8. If you want a much more secure OS try a capabilities based one, Linux is really not a great alternative since is also fundamentally permissions based.
Lotus Notes was an amazing product. The problem is that Lotus Notes was not a competitor to Exchange but rather a platform for company internal databases which also did email. Notes supported properly requires a Notes programming group (i.e. 1/2 dozen + dedicated developers) and an administrative team. Under those conditions Notes is fantastic. Treat Notes like Exchange and have 1 guy or worse part of 1 guy and it sucks.
Ribbon wasn't dumbing down the interface it was adding features. Context sensitive menus allows for more items and greater degrees of embedding than context unaware menus. This is more obvious if you are using add-ons beyond the normal base functionality.
The first part happened about a decade ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_standardization
How do you intend to do the second part?
OpenSuite might be close enough to OpenOffice to get a trademark violation. Given that it would Oracle suing them... I'd go for a name a bit further away.
It might very well work better. Assuming the order for PCs is similar to what happened on Unix then we would expect a progression (each step taking many years) of:
1) Mostly commercial software on commercial OSes
2) Mostly free software on commercial OSes
3) Mostly free software on free OSes
To shift from 2 to 3 requires the makers of the remaining commercial applications to support the shift in operating systems. With Microsoft making lots of money on their server products (especially on enterprise) and Office products they might be willing to be less protective of their desktop OS if they can get more from these other revenue sources. Windows in the cloud makes possible a shift from 2 to 3 the same way that SCO based Unix solutions creating Linux variants made possible a shift for the Unix community in the 1990s and early 2000s.
Under Ballmer Microsoft released a variety of OSes and had an explosion in sales of their enterprise products. Ballmer focused on enterprise not consumers during most of his time as CEO which is why people here think he couldn't do anything.
Windows 8 will be fine. It never really should have been run on Windows 7 hardware. It works well on the right hardware, and the hardware basis needs to change. The purpose of Windows 8 is to provide an operating system that makes use of next generation hardware. Everyone knows the marketshare for Windows 7 hardware is still much larger. So what would marketshare be now but people using the wrong operating system.
No CoS is not free to do what commercial entities do with their profits. There are much stricter regulations on how they pay their staff wages and stricter regulations on how they reinvest. Essentially the money has to be kept within the church system or used to pay reasonable wages.
The no stock is a big one, that means there are no owners pulling huge profits out (at least legally). That is what it means to be a church vs. say a for profit training center.
My "that's likely" was meant to be sarcastic. I agree it was just a mistake.
It is far too advanced for middle management. Middle management doesn't need things like bibliographic support, long complex multi author change tracking, styles, complex tab adjustments, multiple keyboards for foreign languages.... Those are features for people who spend much more time authoring documents than middle management.
I think you have a bunch of axis going on here at the same time.
1) Open source tools vs. closed source
2) General use vs. specialized
3) WYSIWYM vs. WYSIWYG editing.
Let's start with (3). I generally like WYSIWYM more than WYSIWYG environments. That being said WYSIWYG is very useful for content where consistency doesn't matter as much. While there are WYSIWYM systems for presentations but they only really work for data publishing better than WYSIWYG. I think a fairer comparison on this axis might be LyX vs. Word or FrameMarker vs. Word. Going up something like higher end composition engines vs. something like InDesign.
Then there is general use vs specialized. LaTeX is optimized for text with equations which is specialized. Fountain is for screenplays. That's not the same as a product like Word which is all purpose.
Finally open source vs. closed source is a complicating factor. When we consider Word do we consider all the myriad additional cost extensions, for example SharePoint or just the core product? For OpenSource do we consider the entire platform and how these components work together? More importantly closed vs. open goes beyond editing to broader computing issues.
Congressmen work pretty long hours. What's the upside of having congressmen traveling more?
Of course they will. We know that with the grand bargain talks in 2011. Their have been numerous proposals put forth by Democrats to shift and decrease spending, especially in areas of corporate welfare. Obamacare itself was a large attack on private and public spending, the problem of the cost curve. You'll remember that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan tried to run for office against the savings from it.
That funding source also has the unlimited ability to print money. And there is no source more viable than the government.
The Republicans like to point to this. But the way a budget into the Senate is for it to be a House Budget not a House Republican conference budget. That means it passes with wide bipartisan support not narrow partisan support. Which means negotiating with the committee co-chairs and Nancy Pelosi.
If that were happening I'd be onboard blaming Harry Reid. Otherwise it is just Republicans wondering why Democrats won't pass the Republican budget. Why would they?
That's likely.