Not always. Removing options: - Removes bugs in turn reducing potential security vectors. - Reduces complexity making software easier to use and maintain.
And several of your complaints of things they removed were done so because of other's complaints into how the underlying architecture was limited: lack of threading, lack of sandboxing, security nightmares, compatibility problems between releases, to say nothing of the instabilities and memory leaks extensions were able to cause.
It always helps to remember that things are removed for a reason, it may not be the reason *you* want, but there is a reason.
I bet if they added headphone jacks again, the new phones would sell like hotcakes. Who wants to upgrade when there's a huge decrease in functionality?
I'd bet against you. Not because headphone jacks aren't a compelling feature (they are), but because they aren't the reason for lack of demand as shown by previous iPhones.
The simple problem is: Why do you need and iPhone X? What does it do? The answer is absolutely nothing that you're not already somehow doing. The entire phone market reached that stage one or two years ago. There's nothing new. Features are incremental or are changing slightly in terms of usability, but there's nothing "new". Yeah FaceUnlock! My finger already unlocks my phone, that' only a slight usability change. OLED screen!... meh incremental, there's nothing wrong with the previous screen (in fact it's damn awesome as it was).
I agree. We shouldn't have broken the internet with NAT, we should have adopted IPv6 over a decade ago. Unfortunately what we have is known as trying to make do with a shitty situation.
No it wasn't, moron. The best selling EV in Norway cumulative is the Leaf. The FASTEST selling EV LAST YEAR was the iPace
I'm not sure what magic facts you're trying to use here. The iPace didn't do the most sales in the year, it didn't do the most in any month, and didn't do the most in any single day. What about it makes it the fastest selling EV? It's top speed? How long it takes to put down cash and drive out the door? Or some completely other irrelevant and moronic metric that you're trying to use to defend your absurd claim that EVs are for the rich?
They call me a "troll" because they don't know any facts.
Actually they call you a troll because the facts are the fact, but you claim to have your own facts.
And even if it wasn't cleaner the coal power station's tailpipe isn't in the middle of a giant population centre. Even if climate change were not a thing I'd be a huge advocate of EV just so every city did not smell like diesel and wouldn't be full of soot.
The mark of a true IT pro, ignore the requirements of the user. You'll go far in this world.
My point is that while WSL has its advantages, Cygwin and/or a separate Linux VM and/or Docker for Windows has been the way to perform the same tasks from a Windows workstation for over a decade now; a one-year-old method of doing certain Linux tasks without Cygwin or a VM is far from a compelling argument.
What an absurd comment to make. "The way we've done it in the past" is the antithesis of technology and using that to justify ignoring advantages of a new way is just mindblowingly stupid in the IT world.
That update got the machine stuck in a boot loop. I don't care what that laptop was vulnerable to prior to that update, and I don't care what new features are available after. 'preventing your computer from working properly' is a core description of the very malware the security updates are intended to prevent, and the updates caused more problems than the malware.
What you're describing is a problem *you* had in a specific scenario and is completely irrelevant when discussing security of a desktop OS. You're on fire with this "ignoring the user" bit.
What's even better is not having monolithic patches.
Strawmen not relevant to the discussion at hand are even better than monolithic patches.
Golden 'duh' award - those features are still software
I'm out. You're being intetionally dense in this discussion.
The payback terms for the debt you incur for a haircut
Are non-existent. You don't have an agreed payback period. You didn't enter into a contract. You haven't even left the store.
I cannot stress this enough, you cannot enter into an automatic or implied debtor / creditor relationship, ever. This is only possible to do through a manually agreed upon contract.
Even my verbal example is on legally dubious ground in terms of the hairdressor becoming a debtor.
No, you'll get your payout in cash
No you won't. Have you never received court ordered compensation? You will get either a direct debit or a cheque depending on the size of the payout.
The old BIOS already managed to init the CPU, init the memory controller, init the memory, and provide enough setup of PCI devices to find the boot loader or jump to PXE.
Yes and it did so just fine until those very processes became so complex they the didn't fit in the woefully inadequate structure BIOSes had to work with.
Computers have grown more complex. Complexity breeds complexity.
Aside from my comment being in jest and not ment to be taken seriously there's a few parts I do want to comment on
2. Large files are clunky to save to and retrieve from cloud
If this is the case then it sounds like you are actually fighting your OS. Cloud integration in Windows 10 is not only seamless but differential. Handling large files is trivial (I don't use OneDrive personally but I'm forced to through work).
That alone should be good enough reason not to store important documents "in the cloud"
I had an unreadable backup tape once. Clearly I shouldn't use backup tapes for important documents? Note this isn't a question, just an example of how absurd your comment.
And just when should good old Leo stop playing with his basics? We have fully autonomous rail systems all over the world and have had so for many years.
I think you're confused. The Email does not contain the malware. AV software does nothing to stop idiot users from taking very careful aim while shooting themselves in the foot.
> Chipset initialization has gotten too complex to fit in the 1 MB of RAM
8-bit machines only need a few KB for this. WTF are you guys doing that you need more then 1024 KB ???
8bit machines had CPUs where you could count the transistors by hand without making a mistake (8080 had 3500 transistors). My current CPU has over 4billion. You may have noticed computers have gotten more complex.
to do very little, UEFI is complex due to the nature of increased complexity of our computer systems.
To make it worse, unlike old BIOS where clearing the CMOS would recover from any mis-configuration
"Configuration" cal also be cleared by clearing the CMOS.
some implementations of EFI can be bricked.
BIOSes could happily be bricked too. The only reason that it didn't happen more often is that Windows prevented the low level hardware access needed to write to it. Incidentally this also caused big problems for updating or recovering the system if needed.
it turns out UEFI makes a dandy platform for persistent malware.
Any platform could be used for persistent malware. The only reason the old BIOS wasn't is because it was too small. Incidentally there's a long list of viruses from the 90s and early 00s that did modify / corrupt the BIOS, and there's nothing more persistant than owning a large beige paperweight. Also many viruses used the static requirements from the old BIOS to become persistent and we even used to say that boot sector viruses worked at the "BIOS level" in the past for this very reason.
So, NOW can we go back to BIOS and just make it unstand GPTs?
If you knew anything about UEFI and BIOS, you'd know the answer to that is a resounding no. If you think that GPTs is what separates the modern UEFI and the older BIOS in terms of minimal functional requirements to operate your computer then my friend you have some learning to do.
How long until this can be pushed down direct from a website?
Is this even relevant? The human flaw in the security model is one that we've shown for the past 20 years can't be patched. I'm surprised anyone is looking for automated methods anymore when you can just pretend to be Paypal saying there's a problem with your account.
Oh look you're trying to be clever. Good work ignoring the GP's requirements. But let me correct you on your sillyness:
- Cygwin is not a suitable replacement for WSL. Your talk about VMs shows that you don't understand the point in the first place - Slow updates ARE a problem when security is involved. You can happily delay non security updates for 365 days in Windows 10 Pro. LTSB is stupid in this regard. - No windows store is a problem on Windows 10 desktop. It's a central license store for features not only for software. You mention OneNote as if you think you know what you're talking about. Are you aware that OneNote UWP is nearly feature comparable and in many ways surpasses the Office version? Are you aware that depending on what Office 365 subscription you have OneNote activates a different set of features within the app and it requires the presence of the Store to do that?
AFAIK, the LTSB still gets security updates, but is generally intended to be stable...which
So is Windows 10 Pro which as I mentioned provides you more than enough control over updates and is why LTSB adoption is poor even within enterprises that could license the product.
This is one reason why I no longer store documents within the VM
Why are you trying to outsmart your OS? Just put the documents in the cloud. MS themselves consider their system so unreliable and so malware prone that this is a fundamental and necessary feature of Windows 10.
You can't really say that either from that source. Orchestrated and instigated are two different words. But while they did instigate the crash they had no control over this train what so ever, it was not at all automated. They derailed the train movie style, by switching the tracks while the train was already passing through a junction.
That's no more semi-autonomous that cars are due to the presence of traffic lights.
A "semi autonomous" large ore train had to be deliberately derailed in November
No it didn't. A non-autonomous runaway train with no controls and no driver had to be deliberately derailed in November.
You're talking about a different project, different track, all run by a completely different company, and better still a completely different topic (autonomous vs driver controlled).
What are you talking about. There's a world of difference between autonomous cars making a decision on the go on public roads, and a set of carriages able to chose between going forwards or backwards along a 1700km of straight tracks with a couple of privately controlled and operated intersections.
Slashdot Mirror
but it's bad to remove options.
Not always. Removing options:
- Removes bugs in turn reducing potential security vectors.
- Reduces complexity making software easier to use and maintain.
And several of your complaints of things they removed were done so because of other's complaints into how the underlying architecture was limited: lack of threading, lack of sandboxing, security nightmares, compatibility problems between releases, to say nothing of the instabilities and memory leaks extensions were able to cause.
It always helps to remember that things are removed for a reason, it may not be the reason *you* want, but there is a reason.
what did you find...? Missing somthing...?
Pink Floyd. They were irate since they've been waiting there for us since the 70s and were wondering if we would ever show.
I bet if they added headphone jacks again, the new phones would sell like hotcakes. Who wants to upgrade when there's a huge decrease in functionality?
I'd bet against you. Not because headphone jacks aren't a compelling feature (they are), but because they aren't the reason for lack of demand as shown by previous iPhones.
The simple problem is: Why do you need and iPhone X? What does it do? The answer is absolutely nothing that you're not already somehow doing. The entire phone market reached that stage one or two years ago. There's nothing new. Features are incremental or are changing slightly in terms of usability, but there's nothing "new". Yeah FaceUnlock! My finger already unlocks my phone, that' only a slight usability change. OLED screen! ... meh incremental, there's nothing wrong with the previous screen (in fact it's damn awesome as it was).
uPNP is simply retarded and shouldn't exist.
I agree. We shouldn't have broken the internet with NAT, we should have adopted IPv6 over a decade ago. Unfortunately what we have is known as trying to make do with a shitty situation.
The FASTEST selling EV was the iPace.
Repeating stupidities doesn't make them any more factual or any less stupid.
No it wasn't, moron. The best selling EV in Norway cumulative is the Leaf. The FASTEST selling EV LAST YEAR was the iPace
I'm not sure what magic facts you're trying to use here. The iPace didn't do the most sales in the year, it didn't do the most in any month, and didn't do the most in any single day. What about it makes it the fastest selling EV? It's top speed? How long it takes to put down cash and drive out the door? Or some completely other irrelevant and moronic metric that you're trying to use to defend your absurd claim that EVs are for the rich?
They call me a "troll" because they don't know any facts.
Actually they call you a troll because the facts are the fact, but you claim to have your own facts.
And even if it wasn't cleaner the coal power station's tailpipe isn't in the middle of a giant population centre. Even if climate change were not a thing I'd be a huge advocate of EV just so every city did not smell like diesel and wouldn't be full of soot.
That, and the fact the country could fit into Texas twice, you have the perfect place for electric cars.
Yes and no. It's also a country where getting from A to B is often 4 times further thanks to wonderfully windy roads around the amazing scenery.
Now for powering up a hill as you're driving through the fjords, THAT is perfect for electic cars.
To be fair, Amazon was selling a ton of cables that didn't meet the spec and were putting devices in danger of being legitimately damaged.
The solution to this is not "software authentication". It's proper hardware design.
Yes, because they're dumb requirements.
The mark of a true IT pro, ignore the requirements of the user. You'll go far in this world.
My point is that while WSL has its advantages, Cygwin and/or a separate Linux VM and/or Docker for Windows has been the way to perform the same tasks from a Windows workstation for over a decade now; a one-year-old method of doing certain Linux tasks without Cygwin or a VM is far from a compelling argument.
What an absurd comment to make. "The way we've done it in the past" is the antithesis of technology and using that to justify ignoring advantages of a new way is just mindblowingly stupid in the IT world.
That update got the machine stuck in a boot loop. I don't care what that laptop was vulnerable to prior to that update, and I don't care what new features are available after. 'preventing your computer from working properly' is a core description of the very malware the security updates are intended to prevent, and the updates caused more problems than the malware.
What you're describing is a problem *you* had in a specific scenario and is completely irrelevant when discussing security of a desktop OS. You're on fire with this "ignoring the user" bit.
What's even better is not having monolithic patches.
Strawmen not relevant to the discussion at hand are even better than monolithic patches.
Golden 'duh' award - those features are still software
I'm out. You're being intetionally dense in this discussion.
have a good day.
The payback terms for the debt you incur for a haircut
Are non-existent. You don't have an agreed payback period. You didn't enter into a contract. You haven't even left the store.
I cannot stress this enough, you cannot enter into an automatic or implied debtor / creditor relationship, ever. This is only possible to do through a manually agreed upon contract.
Even my verbal example is on legally dubious ground in terms of the hairdressor becoming a debtor.
No, you'll get your payout in cash
No you won't. Have you never received court ordered compensation? You will get either a direct debit or a cheque depending on the size of the payout.
The old BIOS already managed to init the CPU, init the memory controller, init the memory, and provide enough setup of PCI devices to find the boot loader or jump to PXE.
Yes and it did so just fine until those very processes became so complex they the didn't fit in the woefully inadequate structure BIOSes had to work with.
Computers have grown more complex. Complexity breeds complexity.
Aside from my comment being in jest and not ment to be taken seriously there's a few parts I do want to comment on
2. Large files are clunky to save to and retrieve from cloud
If this is the case then it sounds like you are actually fighting your OS. Cloud integration in Windows 10 is not only seamless but differential. Handling large files is trivial (I don't use OneDrive personally but I'm forced to through work).
That alone should be good enough reason not to store important documents "in the cloud"
I had an unreadable backup tape once. Clearly I shouldn't use backup tapes for important documents? Note this isn't a question, just an example of how absurd your comment.
And just when should good old Leo stop playing with his basics? We have fully autonomous rail systems all over the world and have had so for many years.
Also email is often easy to scan by AV software.
I think you're confused. The Email does not contain the malware. AV software does nothing to stop idiot users from taking very careful aim while shooting themselves in the foot.
Worked up over what exactly?
You tell me, you're the one visibily annoyed by my presence, and it pleases me.
> Chipset initialization has gotten too complex to fit in the 1 MB of RAM
8-bit machines only need a few KB for this. WTF are you guys doing that you need more then 1024 KB ???
8bit machines had CPUs where you could count the transistors by hand without making a mistake (8080 had 3500 transistors). My current CPU has over 4billion. You may have noticed computers have gotten more complex.
Unlike old BIOS that only needed
to do very little, UEFI is complex due to the nature of increased complexity of our computer systems.
To make it worse, unlike old BIOS where clearing the CMOS would recover from any mis-configuration
"Configuration" cal also be cleared by clearing the CMOS.
some implementations of EFI can be bricked.
BIOSes could happily be bricked too. The only reason that it didn't happen more often is that Windows prevented the low level hardware access needed to write to it. Incidentally this also caused big problems for updating or recovering the system if needed.
it turns out UEFI makes a dandy platform for persistent malware.
Any platform could be used for persistent malware. The only reason the old BIOS wasn't is because it was too small. Incidentally there's a long list of viruses from the 90s and early 00s that did modify / corrupt the BIOS, and there's nothing more persistant than owning a large beige paperweight. Also many viruses used the static requirements from the old BIOS to become persistent and we even used to say that boot sector viruses worked at the "BIOS level" in the past for this very reason.
So, NOW can we go back to BIOS and just make it unstand GPTs?
If you knew anything about UEFI and BIOS, you'd know the answer to that is a resounding no. If you think that GPTs is what separates the modern UEFI and the older BIOS in terms of minimal functional requirements to operate your computer then my friend you have some learning to do.
How long until this can be pushed down direct from a website?
Is this even relevant? The human flaw in the security model is one that we've shown for the past 20 years can't be patched. I'm surprised anyone is looking for automated methods anymore when you can just pretend to be Paypal saying there's a problem with your account.
Oh look you're trying to be clever. Good work ignoring the GP's requirements. But let me correct you on your sillyness:
- Cygwin is not a suitable replacement for WSL. Your talk about VMs shows that you don't understand the point in the first place
- Slow updates ARE a problem when security is involved. You can happily delay non security updates for 365 days in Windows 10 Pro. LTSB is stupid in this regard.
- No windows store is a problem on Windows 10 desktop. It's a central license store for features not only for software. You mention OneNote as if you think you know what you're talking about. Are you aware that OneNote UWP is nearly feature comparable and in many ways surpasses the Office version? Are you aware that depending on what Office 365 subscription you have OneNote activates a different set of features within the app and it requires the presence of the Store to do that?
AFAIK, the LTSB still gets security updates, but is generally intended to be stable...which
So is Windows 10 Pro which as I mentioned provides you more than enough control over updates and is why LTSB adoption is poor even within enterprises that could license the product.
This is one reason why I no longer store documents within the VM
Why are you trying to outsmart your OS? Just put the documents in the cloud. MS themselves consider their system so unreliable and so malware prone that this is a fundamental and necessary feature of Windows 10.
Gnome (almost) killed desktop Linux
I prefer the term late-stage abortion. "Killing" implied that it was alive and healthy at some point.
BHP crash was remotely instigated
You can't really say that either from that source. Orchestrated and instigated are two different words. But while they did instigate the crash they had no control over this train what so ever, it was not at all automated. They derailed the train movie style, by switching the tracks while the train was already passing through a junction.
That's no more semi-autonomous that cars are due to the presence of traffic lights.
A "semi autonomous" large ore train had to be deliberately derailed in November
No it didn't. A non-autonomous runaway train with no controls and no driver had to be deliberately derailed in November.
You're talking about a different project, different track, all run by a completely different company, and better still a completely different topic (autonomous vs driver controlled).
What are you talking about. There's a world of difference between autonomous cars making a decision on the go on public roads, and a set of carriages able to chose between going forwards or backwards along a 1700km of straight tracks with a couple of privately controlled and operated intersections.