Yes they are. They just don't get a lot of coverage here. For example there are substantial improvements to Bing and Bing integration. The search APIs are being massively overhauled, Microsoft is allowing search and data integration features delivered from the web to be integrated directly into applications. I have no idea if this is going to work,but this could be a major differentiator. The "start menu" to Metro thing everyone is complaining about is actually a system of dashboards allowing Metro to run and be called by Desktop. That's a huge step towards integration. There is better integration with Skydrive and most likely at the enterprise level with Azure services....
You have to be piss poor in not demanding that Windows 8 systems have Windows 8 hardware. Yes it is Vista all over again same mistake in allowing OEMs to sell the newest operating system without the right hardware.
The NFL is not a good example. In 1966 it was explicitly allowed to file as a 501c6. That's black letter law, not the enforcement of a regulation. Congress not the IRS is who you should be complaining to.
OK the article should have said what this means and didn't. The IRS reinstates 501c3 status pretty easily once you clean up your paperwork. You can apply for retroactive reinstatement but that requires a good explanation of why they didn't file, and if X.org's reason is some variant of "we forgot" that won't cut it. This means they are liable for corporate income taxes but I'm sure their expenses easily kill any income. The big problem is often state taxes apply during the period where they are off the 501c3 rolls. But here they might be able to do OK on an appeal.
My guess is that this is not going to be too expensive but it will be annoying.
My post was about enterprise Servers: SQL Server's huge growth and Sharepoint. Also products like Lync.
Re:Private clouds: done, but not done well so far
on
Ballmer To Retire
·
· Score: 1
I agree that Microsoft is a good choice for private cloud. On the other hand they don't want to start World War 3 with hosting companies so they have to be somewhat careful.
Re:Ballmer's replacement - a possible strategy?
on
Ballmer To Retire
·
· Score: 1
They do promote private clouds. They have an Azure for hosting companies that lets you role out your own Azure to taste. They also offer private cloud versions / services where they manage.
He transitioned Microsoft from being a desktop company to selling a range of server solutions which are quite profitable. He pushed Microsoft up market. He didn't do much in consumer he did a ton in enterprise and the growth in sales shows that.
I'd say it came from their speed in switching to x86 and cheap Unixes. Sun had the strongest ties to hardware so they had the most difficulty staying with Solaris and Sparc. IBM was already focused on consulting so they had the least difficulty. HP had different divisions with different interests so on average they were in the middle somewhere.
iOS7 complete redesign of the OS. New version of OSX New form factor for workstation entirely new manufacturing process for phones Just slightly over a year ago the invention of retina laptops
This is a long post. I've been using Linux since 1995, still do and I think it has vastly inferior driver support to Windows. It used to be 2nd best by a mile but Apple has been catching up. There is nothing wrong with giving Microsoft credit for the many billions they've spent supporting the incredible complexity of x86 hardware. Nor is there anything wrong with pointing out the disadvantages of a diverse user base.
Uh, no. QNX is a very recent development for RIM. Historically all those BBOS features were written against their in-house BBOS kernel, not QNX. Moving to QNX required a porting effort.
Yes it did. And moving it to Linux would require another porting effort.
Dude, stop bullshittin' about stuff you don't know about. It only takes a couple seconds of googling to determine that the word "syntonization" doesn't mean what you think it means. It's a low level radio function.
Dude, it is a typo. Autocorrection for misspelled synchronization
You seriously believe that Balance would be impossible to implement on another kernel? It sounds well within the scope of sandboxing, which is available on Linux and XNU.
I didn't say that. And in context I said the opposite. What I did say was that it was how RIM/Blackberry did implement Balance.
UNIX's authors were on the Multics team so they had access to machines in the GE-600 series (far better than a PDP-7). The PDP-7 was a piece of junk in the basement that they were doing a skunkworks project on as a protest against Multics, hence the name play.
What good does that do? Those machines are Windows 7 machines: no touchscreen, no adjustable hinge, no high resolution touchpad.... Who cares if they upgrade from Windows 7 or Windows 8 or not?
But, for many others 10-15 years is a reasonable lifetime.
Microsoft has never ever ever claimed to sell machines with a 10-15 support lifetime. Rather they have said much the opposite. Anyone using Windows with such support goals in mind is misusing the product. IBM offers products on those sorts of support cycles.
sold is going to kill your budget, shortening the lifetime to 7-8 years.
Microsoft likely is going to shorten it more than that. They've allowed this culture of long product life cycles to develop to everyone's detriment.
How will they force them? Microsoft has announced this date, except for extending it twice for over a decade. The hospital deliberately choose to ignore instructions to upgrade when told to. Now of course Microsoft might work out some sort of arrangement like $100 per system per month for extended support beyond the date if there is enough interest, but I'm not sure they want the bad publicity from even offering a high end support contract to the skin flint customers still on XP.
Microsoft with the exception of Windows embedded has never claimed to be selling infrastructure. People using their products as such were misusing them. There were other vendors and still are who offer OSes that don't shift.
Apple users don't only not complain they see it as an advantage. They have a fast moving community where Apple announces a technology and it is integrated into the entire ecosystem of applications within a few years.
Why does the fact that your company use old computers make it cost effective for someone to support old computers. It is not your company making money but how much they pay in fees for support contracts that makes them worth supporting.
IBM / mainframe offers these sorts of long term support arrangement. Microsoft has never claimed to be interested in them.
It is not about "support" -- personally I've never phoned Microsoft despite 30 years in the business. It is about deliberate breakage. Windows 8 won't run 16-bit Windows binaries -- major deliberate breakage, with no thunking layer, for some unknown reason. Does Ubuntu do this? I doubt it. Does Apple do this? Probably not as severely.
Huh? Win32 was standard by 1995. Let's take a comparison June 6, 2005: Switch to Intel from PPC announced January 10, 2006: First Intel based systems sold August 7, 2006: No more PPC systems available. August 28, 2009: First OS with no PPC hardware support July 20, 2011: First OS with no PPC application support.
Apple is much more aggressive about obsolesce.
As for Ubuntu. Linux has an different model because people can compile their own applications. But Ubuntu didn't even exist until 2004.
Microsoft backdown on previous deadlines because of netbooks. At the time they weren't willing to see a non Microsoft OS take the low end of the market. With phones and tablets that's a done deal. They need their OEMs and customers to move up market, spending more. What upside would there be for them to back down?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes they are. They just don't get a lot of coverage here. For example there are substantial improvements to Bing and Bing integration. The search APIs are being massively overhauled, Microsoft is allowing search and data integration features delivered from the web to be integrated directly into applications. I have no idea if this is going to work,but this could be a major differentiator. The "start menu" to Metro thing everyone is complaining about is actually a system of dashboards allowing Metro to run and be called by Desktop. That's a huge step towards integration. There is better integration with Skydrive and most likely at the enterprise level with Azure services....
You have to be piss poor in not demanding that Windows 8 systems have Windows 8 hardware. Yes it is Vista all over again same mistake in allowing OEMs to sell the newest operating system without the right hardware.
The NFL is not a good example. In 1966 it was explicitly allowed to file as a 501c6. That's black letter law, not the enforcement of a regulation. Congress not the IRS is who you should be complaining to.
X.org is the group writing X11. So, no I'd say a large chunk of /.ers if not a majority will use their software during any given decade.
OK the article should have said what this means and didn't. The IRS reinstates 501c3 status pretty easily once you clean up your paperwork. You can apply for retroactive reinstatement but that requires a good explanation of why they didn't file, and if X.org's reason is some variant of "we forgot" that won't cut it. This means they are liable for corporate income taxes but I'm sure their expenses easily kill any income. The big problem is often state taxes apply during the period where they are off the 501c3 rolls. But here they might be able to do OK on an appeal.
My guess is that this is not going to be too expensive but it will be annoying.
My post was about enterprise Servers: SQL Server's huge growth and Sharepoint. Also products like Lync.
I agree that Microsoft is a good choice for private cloud. On the other hand they don't want to start World War 3 with hosting companies so they have to be somewhat careful.
They do promote private clouds. They have an Azure for hosting companies that lets you role out your own Azure to taste. They also offer private cloud versions / services where they manage.
He transitioned Microsoft from being a desktop company to selling a range of server solutions which are quite profitable. He pushed Microsoft up market. He didn't do much in consumer he did a ton in enterprise and the growth in sales shows that.
I'd say it came from their speed in switching to x86 and cheap Unixes. Sun had the strongest ties to hardware so they had the most difficulty staying with Solaris and Sparc. IBM was already focused on consulting so they had the least difficulty. HP had different divisions with different interests so on average they were in the middle somewhere.
In the last year
iOS7 complete redesign of the OS.
New version of OSX
New form factor for workstation
entirely new manufacturing process for phones
Just slightly over a year ago the invention of retina laptops
Not quite. When the iPhone came out there were other smartphones that in the aggregate did everything it did. That's a very very different statement.
a) fluid web interactions
b) capacitive touchscreen
c) animations used in interface
was a unique combination.
This is a long post. I've been using Linux since 1995, still do and I think it has vastly inferior driver support to Windows. It used to be 2nd best by a mile but Apple has been catching up. There is nothing wrong with giving Microsoft credit for the many billions they've spent supporting the incredible complexity of x86 hardware. Nor is there anything wrong with pointing out the disadvantages of a diverse user base.
Yes it did. And moving it to Linux would require another porting effort.
Dude, it is a typo. Autocorrection for misspelled synchronization
I didn't say that. And in context I said the opposite. What I did say was that it was how RIM/Blackberry did implement Balance.
UNIX's authors were on the Multics team so they had access to machines in the GE-600 series (far better than a PDP-7). The PDP-7 was a piece of junk in the basement that they were doing a skunkworks project on as a protest against Multics, hence the name play.
What good does that do? Those machines are Windows 7 machines: no touchscreen, no adjustable hinge, no high resolution touchpad.... Who cares if they upgrade from Windows 7 or Windows 8 or not?
Microsoft has never ever ever claimed to sell machines with a 10-15 support lifetime. Rather they have said much the opposite. Anyone using Windows with such support goals in mind is misusing the product. IBM offers products on those sorts of support cycles.
Microsoft likely is going to shorten it more than that. They've allowed this culture of long product life cycles to develop to everyone's detriment.
How will they force them? Microsoft has announced this date, except for extending it twice for over a decade. The hospital deliberately choose to ignore instructions to upgrade when told to. Now of course Microsoft might work out some sort of arrangement like $100 per system per month for extended support beyond the date if there is enough interest, but I'm not sure they want the bad publicity from even offering a high end support contract to the skin flint customers still on XP.
Microsoft with the exception of Windows embedded has never claimed to be selling infrastructure. People using their products as such were misusing them. There were other vendors and still are who offer OSes that don't shift.
Apple users don't only not complain they see it as an advantage. They have a fast moving community where Apple announces a technology and it is integrated into the entire ecosystem of applications within a few years.
How does this not make sense for Microsoft?
Why does the fact that your company use old computers make it cost effective for someone to support old computers. It is not your company making money but how much they pay in fees for support contracts that makes them worth supporting.
IBM / mainframe offers these sorts of long term support arrangement. Microsoft has never claimed to be interested in them.
Huh? Win32 was standard by 1995. Let's take a comparison
June 6, 2005: Switch to Intel from PPC announced
January 10, 2006: First Intel based systems sold
August 7, 2006: No more PPC systems available.
August 28, 2009: First OS with no PPC hardware support
July 20, 2011: First OS with no PPC application support.
Apple is much more aggressive about obsolesce.
As for Ubuntu. Linux has an different model because people can compile their own applications. But Ubuntu didn't even exist until 2004.
Microsoft backdown on previous deadlines because of netbooks. At the time they weren't willing to see a non Microsoft OS take the low end of the market. With phones and tablets that's a done deal. They need their OEMs and customers to move up market, spending more. What upside would there be for them to back down?
OSX doesn't ship with a VM. The most popular VM for Apple is http://www.parallels.com/