I would have expected Microsoft to pack it in by now. They've been at this mobile Windows thing since the 1990s
Other than a comparison to the Surface RT failure where does it say Windows Mobile? If these things run Windows 10 S it will already be lightyears ahead of the Surface RT failure and a clear indication that MS could actually be learning from past mistakes.
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with low-cost computing. But MS's attempt so far have not been compatible with the traditional term "computing". If they can cram a Surface Pro 2/3 into a smaller space with a lower cost they may actually be on to a winner.
Underpowered for whom? Yes I run Lightroom on my Surface Pro and it starts getting strained. But the vast majority of users out there will at the very worst subject their little toys to running Word or Excel.
Not everyone needs a workstation. Those people who play with tiny tablets definitely not so.
I am keenly watching snaps and docker for this reason. Package managers while simplifying processes are not a panacea, the big problem being that they frequently aren't up to date. Sure you can install a repository from someone else, but that is just step one to hosing your system.
This is not about trust of third parties, this is about trust and management of internal data, the blockchain and ledger replacing traditional databases with integrity checking and verification on the way.
Last time I signed up to internet (not in the USA) I didn't only NOT have a sign-up fee, but I also didn't pay anything out of pocket for the hardware they gave me, and on top of that I had a 50% discount on the service for the first 4 months.
Yeah and? WHen I cycle to the store it's dark, when I walk through the city it's dark. Don't let the lack of light stop you from going outside. Bonus points is that the air is fresher at night.
Very few people have clean filtered indoor air. Even in many city centres over the course of the year you're better off breathing Ozone and NOx and particulate matter to the various VOCs that tend to accumulate inside buildings. Extra bonus points for taking a nice deep breath while cleaning you windows, washing your walls while your partner sprays deodorant and makeup everywhere.
Indoor air is not as clean as you think.
And extra extra bonus points for using an air purifier that generates ozone in the process.
Companies haven't eliminated long-term employees. They've eliminated old employees. Generally the younger generation have nothing to fear... and the older generation have nothing to fall back on.
We're not living in 1958 where someone could go to work for GM or IBM at 21 and work there for 40 years till retirement.
The time has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of 20-Lifers working in giant Fortune 500 companies just like the old days. What has changed is the expectation of the people, not the company. If the company keeps it interesting, fresh, remunerates well, and generally doesn't mistreat you then there may be no reason to change.
I bucked the trend in my generation. I've worked at the same company for 10 years. In 6 very different roles for very different departments. In 4 different countries around the world. Every move feels like I work for a different company but people who jump from company to company can't understand it. When I get bored, I'll quit and find something else.
Employers can fire you at a moment's notice -- why should they expect more loyalty in return?
Employers don't expect loyalty. That is precisely why keeping jobs interesting and roles changing is trending theme in these large companies. This hasn't changed in the last 40 years either. Employers have never expected loyalty, but in the past they have often valued it through time based remuneration. When that stopped working, well... lets just say I'm not relying on my pay rises to keep me handcuffed to a table.
Serious if I was going to search for "How to be a Kinky Furry" on Youtube, why would I even want that in my local browser history? Just use the browser incognito mode. That will isolate it from your account altogether.
and somehow YT keeps recommending me videos relevant to the ones I watched few days ago
How did you find those videos? The pause watch and search history only applies to to your profile created from within Youtube. If you browse to youtube from some other site the resulting video ends up in your profile anyway.
The thing to bear in mind here is that Cambridge Analytica managed to obtain only a relatively small percentage of information about Facebook Users. The information it managed to obtain was either information voluntarily provided by users in response to a survey, or publicly-visible information carried by "friends" of the relatively small number of users who took their survey.
You're underplaying the significance of what was "voluntarily provided" in a survey. The API did not allow any fine grained permissions. What was actually provided by undertaking the survey users handed over their survey answers, their complete private profile, their history, likes, affiliations, locations, as well as trusted information by friends which itself is not considered public information. Facebook already handed over far more than users had in their profiles, and certainly far more than their friends thought were being shared.
This is precisely the outrage at this discovery. If it was just a bit of stuff that users "voluntarily" shared then it wouldn't be an issue.
An equivalent FB insider, anyone who chose to reveal the full scope of what FB can do, would scare most people silly.
The information a company collects on people only determines one side of the risk matrix. The other is the likelihood of abuse of information. This is why FB is also currently getting the scrutiny they are, not because of the data they collect, but because of the trust breach that occurred due to the scope of sharing. Look to your co-worker. The number of ways they could kill you should scare you silly, but it doesn't because there's a good chance that they won't. That chance needs to be combined with their capabilities in order to understand the risk. If you don't take the likelihood of a scenario occurring into account, then you're probably also afraid of your own shadow.
FB won't be undone but what it can do, but by breaching the assumption of what it is likely to do.... As has already been shown.
I can't find the quote anymore but back in the 00s in Tesla's early life I remember a quite from Musk saying the ultimate goal of Telsa was to be driven out of business by major car manufacturer's extensive line of electric cars. Musk got into this game to change the world run by stubborn dirty companies, and he's on the way to doing just that.
Secondly, storage is generally most valuable close to demand, and not close to generation.
That depends on the purpose of the storage. Storage designated for grid stability (e.g. batteries rapidly compensating a shift in frequency while peakers come online) is most valuable close to the generation. The lights stay on if the generators don't trip on load/frequency deviations.
Storage for the purpose of dispensing energy continuously at regular intervals (e.g. batteries compensating for the peak demand after sunset) however is most valuable close to demand as there are less system losses.
Call me when he gets his backlog of car orders filled.
I don't need to. I'm calling you out right now for the pathetic little twerp who shits on quite epic achievements of other people that you are.
Call me yet again when Tesla becomes more than a boutique/niche car manufacturer
This one fascinates me, given that this company has singlehandedly changed both the car and the power industry. I guess you'll keep shitting on them until they somehow become some major monopoly force, all the while completely ignoring that Tesla has achieved far more in their first 15 years than Ford ever did.
If they can't hit at least Porsche yearly sales levels, they will never be considered anything else.
Hit Porche where? Telsa delivered 50% more cars in their home market of America (a market of 350million people) than Porch did in all their home market of Europe (a market double the size). The fact that you think a car company that delivered just shy of 100000 vehicles in 2017 despite only having 2 very expensive cars in a market that is actively aggressive to their technology is a minor "boutique/niche" company is quite laughable.
Now you can call me when you change the world. Tesla already have those credentials by proving something that car companies have dismissed and in doing so they became the number one EV manufacturer in America. How "boutique".
Apparently you haven't had to actually deal with compatibility between Linux filesystems and Windows boxes using Samba.
No I haven't. Mainly because in the past 15 years I haven't seen any.
Actually that's a lie, I have seen a few but all have been down to the Samba team changing not some protocol level thing but rather depreciating or introducing some new settings with some default that is overwritten by an old config file.
While you're searching across the web, just marvel at the number of "I upgraded and now this doesn't work" Samba "incompatibilities" that are fixed by starting with the default config file for the current version of samba. If you can make your corner case go away without editing and recompiling the samba code, then the problem is not in the protocol.
Ubuntu was a classic one day upping the major version of Samba without going through the process of warning the user that the config file requirements have changed. For me, that broke authentication with Windows 10 machines.
That "something else" is Tesla producing the more expensive options first in order to increase margins.
I like that word. "first". Your word, not mine. So what you're saying is there is a cheap model, it exists, and you can pre-order it, but it's just not coming off the production line due to the production issues they are facing.
Oh please. "real food" can be bought at any local supermarket. You don't need some super fancy organically grown, picked by virgins on a farm run by hippies apple to make a healthy and cheap apple pie.
If you are so poor that your utilities regularly get turned off, it isn't. You need refrigeration for real food.
Let's break this argument down shall we: a) You start with an extreme edge case. There are very few people in America who can't afford to run a small fridge. b) The argument is circular. If they were eating cheap real food maybe they would be able to afford to have a fridge, given the entire premise that it saves money. c) You don't need to feed an entire family for a week on a shopping trip. Our fridge is empty most of the week, the only things in there is beer and ice cream. There are few things that need refrigeration other than dairy and meat, and there's no reason those can't be bought on a daily basis. I said my fridge is empty but I pretty much eat meat every day, and dairy every other. Buy as needed. My shopping list for tonight includes a 350g bavette and 75g mini container of sour cream for the sauce. There are many other things I need for dinner, but most of them I already have at home... in a cupboard because most things in food don't perish in any unreasonable time.
Your claim that privately built infrastructure would collapse is without merit, as is your hidden assumption that government built infrastructure never collapses.
Well two things: The former is often backed up, especially in the road example with real world cases (e.g. see how many of the private toll roads in Australia remained in business without the government buying out the business, if you guessed 0% you would be right). But on a philosophical level much infrastructure requires a backhaul or trunk at some point. Private point-to-point systems imply no sharing. No sharing implies no economies of scale and for infrastructure projects economies of scale is ultimately what kills it (e.g. people refusing to pay tolls through a tunnel and preferring to be stuck in traffic).
You can do this yourself by a simple thought experiment: You have a coal mine, a town, and a port. Everyone is out for themselves. The port builds a road to the coal mine and no one else gets to use it. The end result is a success because the economies of scale are backed by the product shipped over the road. It is worth one company building this private road. Everyone in the town builds a road to the coal mine. It fails miserably. A person can no afford to build their own way to a destination, let alone run 1000 parallel roads. So some form of collective agreement is needed. Okay in this case everyone is going to the same place so a private company builds the road for you and you pay them (kind of like a tax, but not a tax so a republican can sleep at night). This system works... right until you don't need to go to the coal mine and instead need to go to the shopping centre, right until someone else comes to town (why should they have access, we've paid more than them in aggregate), right until the users realise a middle man is turning a profit on doing nothing.
This is basic high-school level macro-economics. You don't need a fancy degree to understand the role of government in infrastructure development.
Secondly, I have no hidden assumption. Don't read into things that aren't there, it saves a lot of misunderstanding. Government systems fail all the time, as does government itself. The collective government is a solution to very specific macro-economic scenarios, but those aren't the only things that break infrastructure.
1) This is a red herring since ultimately the point was that there is nothing Legacy and only for supporting Windows machines about Samba. 2) Samba has no problems adopting the latest standard. In fact the first release candidate of the Samba 4.3 which supports the current 3.1.1 protocol was released before Windows 10 (first to support 3.1.1) was. There was 5 weeks between the release of Windows 10 and Samba 4.3 Stable. Hardly a problem by any stretch of the imagination and a completely non issue if you didn't upgrade due to backwards compatibility. 3) The protocol is incredibly stable with few major changes. The last major version change was in 2013, the one preceding it was 2006, minor incremental changes happen over a period of several years and do not introduce incompatibilities. What's my point? Admins have no technical reason to be reluctant to upgrade, and admins have no technical reasons to force the upgrade either unless their current major version ceases getting security updates (SMB2 released in 2006 is still covered, and SMB1 which is now depreciated due to fundamental flaws had a good long 20+ year life). From an administration and support point of view, Samba is more or less and ideal scenario in the IT world, far outliving the useful life of the very systems that gave birth to it (Microsoft OSes)
Slashdot Mirror
I would have expected Microsoft to pack it in by now. They've been at this mobile Windows thing since the 1990s
Other than a comparison to the Surface RT failure where does it say Windows Mobile? If these things run Windows 10 S it will already be lightyears ahead of the Surface RT failure and a clear indication that MS could actually be learning from past mistakes.
There's nothing fundamentally wrong with low-cost computing. But MS's attempt so far have not been compatible with the traditional term "computing". If they can cram a Surface Pro 2/3 into a smaller space with a lower cost they may actually be on to a winner.
Underpowered for whom? Yes I run Lightroom on my Surface Pro and it starts getting strained. But the vast majority of users out there will at the very worst subject their little toys to running Word or Excel.
Not everyone needs a workstation. Those people who play with tiny tablets definitely not so.
I knew the smartphone market was small but I didn't realise it was made up of 4 phones. Thanks for clarifying.
I am keenly watching snaps and docker for this reason. Package managers while simplifying processes are not a panacea, the big problem being that they frequently aren't up to date. Sure you can install a repository from someone else, but that is just step one to hosing your system.
We use it. .... Mostly to show off fancy gear to prospective clients. Not for anything practical. It is fun to play with though.
This is not about trust of third parties, this is about trust and management of internal data, the blockchain and ledger replacing traditional databases with integrity checking and verification on the way.
Last time I signed up to internet (not in the USA) I didn't only NOT have a sign-up fee, but I also didn't pay anything out of pocket for the hardware they gave me, and on top of that I had a 50% discount on the service for the first 4 months.
It's called competition.
Yeah and? WHen I cycle to the store it's dark, when I walk through the city it's dark. Don't let the lack of light stop you from going outside. Bonus points is that the air is fresher at night.
Give me clean filtered indoor air
Very few people have clean filtered indoor air. Even in many city centres over the course of the year you're better off breathing Ozone and NOx and particulate matter to the various VOCs that tend to accumulate inside buildings. Extra bonus points for taking a nice deep breath while cleaning you windows, washing your walls while your partner sprays deodorant and makeup everywhere.
Indoor air is not as clean as you think.
And extra extra bonus points for using an air purifier that generates ozone in the process.
Companies haven't eliminated long-term employees. They've eliminated old employees. Generally the younger generation have nothing to fear... and the older generation have nothing to fall back on.
We're not living in 1958 where someone could go to work for GM or IBM at 21 and work there for 40 years till retirement.
The time has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of 20-Lifers working in giant Fortune 500 companies just like the old days. What has changed is the expectation of the people, not the company. If the company keeps it interesting, fresh, remunerates well, and generally doesn't mistreat you then there may be no reason to change.
I bucked the trend in my generation. I've worked at the same company for 10 years. In 6 very different roles for very different departments. In 4 different countries around the world. Every move feels like I work for a different company but people who jump from company to company can't understand it. When I get bored, I'll quit and find something else.
Employers can fire you at a moment's notice -- why should they expect more loyalty in return?
Employers don't expect loyalty. That is precisely why keeping jobs interesting and roles changing is trending theme in these large companies. This hasn't changed in the last 40 years either. Employers have never expected loyalty, but in the past they have often valued it through time based remuneration. When that stopped working, well... lets just say I'm not relying on my pay rises to keep me handcuffed to a table.
Serious if I was going to search for "How to be a Kinky Furry" on Youtube, why would I even want that in my local browser history? Just use the browser incognito mode. That will isolate it from your account altogether.
and somehow YT keeps recommending me videos relevant to the ones I watched few days ago
How did you find those videos? The pause watch and search history only applies to to your profile created from within Youtube. If you browse to youtube from some other site the resulting video ends up in your profile anyway.
The thing to bear in mind here is that Cambridge Analytica managed to obtain only a relatively small percentage of information about Facebook Users. The information it managed to obtain was either information voluntarily provided by users in response to a survey, or publicly-visible information carried by "friends" of the relatively small number of users who took their survey.
You're underplaying the significance of what was "voluntarily provided" in a survey. The API did not allow any fine grained permissions. What was actually provided by undertaking the survey users handed over their survey answers, their complete private profile, their history, likes, affiliations, locations, as well as trusted information by friends which itself is not considered public information. Facebook already handed over far more than users had in their profiles, and certainly far more than their friends thought were being shared.
This is precisely the outrage at this discovery. If it was just a bit of stuff that users "voluntarily" shared then it wouldn't be an issue.
An equivalent FB insider, anyone who chose to reveal the full scope of what FB can do, would scare most people silly.
The information a company collects on people only determines one side of the risk matrix. The other is the likelihood of abuse of information. This is why FB is also currently getting the scrutiny they are, not because of the data they collect, but because of the trust breach that occurred due to the scope of sharing. Look to your co-worker. The number of ways they could kill you should scare you silly, but it doesn't because there's a good chance that they won't. That chance needs to be combined with their capabilities in order to understand the risk. If you don't take the likelihood of a scenario occurring into account, then you're probably also afraid of your own shadow.
FB won't be undone but what it can do, but by breaching the assumption of what it is likely to do. ... As has already been shown.
I can't find the quote anymore but back in the 00s in Tesla's early life I remember a quite from Musk saying the ultimate goal of Telsa was to be driven out of business by major car manufacturer's extensive line of electric cars. Musk got into this game to change the world run by stubborn dirty companies, and he's on the way to doing just that.
Secondly, storage is generally most valuable close to demand, and not close to generation.
That depends on the purpose of the storage. Storage designated for grid stability (e.g. batteries rapidly compensating a shift in frequency while peakers come online) is most valuable close to the generation. The lights stay on if the generators don't trip on load/frequency deviations.
Storage for the purpose of dispensing energy continuously at regular intervals (e.g. batteries compensating for the peak demand after sunset) however is most valuable close to demand as there are less system losses.
How can a company limit an employee's rights to proceed legally against a company in case of criminal conduct?
They can't. But then that should be no surprise coming from a company with such a good understanding of how to obey the law like Uber.
changing its policies to allow customers, employees and drivers who are sexually harassed or assaulted
I'm sure this goes without saying, but Uber have no idea how laws work.
Call me when he gets his backlog of car orders filled.
I don't need to. I'm calling you out right now for the pathetic little twerp who shits on quite epic achievements of other people that you are.
Call me yet again when Tesla becomes more than a boutique/niche car manufacturer
This one fascinates me, given that this company has singlehandedly changed both the car and the power industry. I guess you'll keep shitting on them until they somehow become some major monopoly force, all the while completely ignoring that Tesla has achieved far more in their first 15 years than Ford ever did.
If they can't hit at least Porsche yearly sales levels, they will never be considered anything else.
Hit Porche where? Telsa delivered 50% more cars in their home market of America (a market of 350million people) than Porch did in all their home market of Europe (a market double the size). The fact that you think a car company that delivered just shy of 100000 vehicles in 2017 despite only having 2 very expensive cars in a market that is actively aggressive to their technology is a minor "boutique/niche" company is quite laughable.
Now you can call me when you change the world. Tesla already have those credentials by proving something that car companies have dismissed and in doing so they became the number one EV manufacturer in America. How "boutique".
Apparently you haven't had to actually deal with compatibility between Linux filesystems and Windows boxes using Samba.
No I haven't. Mainly because in the past 15 years I haven't seen any.
Actually that's a lie, I have seen a few but all have been down to the Samba team changing not some protocol level thing but rather depreciating or introducing some new settings with some default that is overwritten by an old config file.
While you're searching across the web, just marvel at the number of "I upgraded and now this doesn't work" Samba "incompatibilities" that are fixed by starting with the default config file for the current version of samba. If you can make your corner case go away without editing and recompiling the samba code, then the problem is not in the protocol.
Ubuntu was a classic one day upping the major version of Samba without going through the process of warning the user that the config file requirements have changed. For me, that broke authentication with Windows 10 machines.
That "something else" is Tesla producing the more expensive options first in order to increase margins.
I like that word. "first". Your word, not mine. So what you're saying is there is a cheap model, it exists, and you can pre-order it, but it's just not coming off the production line due to the production issues they are facing.
You have to travel to get to real food
Oh please. "real food" can be bought at any local supermarket. You don't need some super fancy organically grown, picked by virgins on a farm run by hippies apple to make a healthy and cheap apple pie.
If you are so poor that your utilities regularly get turned off, it isn't. You need refrigeration for real food.
Let's break this argument down shall we: ... in a cupboard because most things in food don't perish in any unreasonable time.
a) You start with an extreme edge case. There are very few people in America who can't afford to run a small fridge.
b) The argument is circular. If they were eating cheap real food maybe they would be able to afford to have a fridge, given the entire premise that it saves money.
c) You don't need to feed an entire family for a week on a shopping trip. Our fridge is empty most of the week, the only things in there is beer and ice cream. There are few things that need refrigeration other than dairy and meat, and there's no reason those can't be bought on a daily basis. I said my fridge is empty but I pretty much eat meat every day, and dairy every other. Buy as needed. My shopping list for tonight includes a 350g bavette and 75g mini container of sour cream for the sauce. There are many other things I need for dinner, but most of them I already have at home
Your claim that privately built infrastructure would collapse is without merit, as is your hidden assumption that government built infrastructure never collapses.
Well two things: The former is often backed up, especially in the road example with real world cases (e.g. see how many of the private toll roads in Australia remained in business without the government buying out the business, if you guessed 0% you would be right). But on a philosophical level much infrastructure requires a backhaul or trunk at some point. Private point-to-point systems imply no sharing. No sharing implies no economies of scale and for infrastructure projects economies of scale is ultimately what kills it (e.g. people refusing to pay tolls through a tunnel and preferring to be stuck in traffic).
You can do this yourself by a simple thought experiment:
You have a coal mine, a town, and a port. Everyone is out for themselves.
The port builds a road to the coal mine and no one else gets to use it. The end result is a success because the economies of scale are backed by the product shipped over the road. It is worth one company building this private road.
Everyone in the town builds a road to the coal mine. It fails miserably. A person can no afford to build their own way to a destination, let alone run 1000 parallel roads. So some form of collective agreement is needed. Okay in this case everyone is going to the same place so a private company builds the road for you and you pay them (kind of like a tax, but not a tax so a republican can sleep at night). This system works... right until you don't need to go to the coal mine and instead need to go to the shopping centre, right until someone else comes to town (why should they have access, we've paid more than them in aggregate), right until the users realise a middle man is turning a profit on doing nothing.
This is basic high-school level macro-economics. You don't need a fancy degree to understand the role of government in infrastructure development.
Secondly, I have no hidden assumption. Don't read into things that aren't there, it saves a lot of misunderstanding. Government systems fail all the time, as does government itself. The collective government is a solution to very specific macro-economic scenarios, but those aren't the only things that break infrastructure.
tens millions of machines, you're wrong
10s of millions of machines is effectively zero marketshare in desktop computing.
Perspective: You're in desperate need of some. When you get some we can work on your understanding of business strategy.
Well three things.
1) This is a red herring since ultimately the point was that there is nothing Legacy and only for supporting Windows machines about Samba.
2) Samba has no problems adopting the latest standard. In fact the first release candidate of the Samba 4.3 which supports the current 3.1.1 protocol was released before Windows 10 (first to support 3.1.1) was. There was 5 weeks between the release of Windows 10 and Samba 4.3 Stable. Hardly a problem by any stretch of the imagination and a completely non issue if you didn't upgrade due to backwards compatibility.
3) The protocol is incredibly stable with few major changes. The last major version change was in 2013, the one preceding it was 2006, minor incremental changes happen over a period of several years and do not introduce incompatibilities. What's my point? Admins have no technical reason to be reluctant to upgrade, and admins have no technical reasons to force the upgrade either unless their current major version ceases getting security updates (SMB2 released in 2006 is still covered, and SMB1 which is now depreciated due to fundamental flaws had a good long 20+ year life). From an administration and support point of view, Samba is more or less and ideal scenario in the IT world, far outliving the useful life of the very systems that gave birth to it (Microsoft OSes)