you don't need to download anything in order to enable the firewall on XP. unless there are some exploits that circumvent the firewall you can easily and safely connect to the internet and visit windows update...
I'm not sure what you mean by 'forced incompatibilities'. Are you saying that it's impossible for two mac users to be 'compatible' without using Microsoft products? If not then that sounds like an option to me.
The rest of your argument seems to revolve around your inability to interoperate in a non-windows world, but as far as I can tell there's no technical or logistical reason (beyond the stubbornness of others) that this is so.
My point is that if you wanted to go totally non-Microsoft then you could, you have the option, nobody's forcing you to use their products. Sure, it may be inconveient for you if you don't, but that's your problem/fault, not theirs.
well, your statement quoted above would seem to imply that a market that's not open would not provide options. given that there are options, your statement would seem to be saying that the market is open. maybe you should reword your statement?
No, windows and message queues (and other similar GDI/USER objects) are managed by the kernel in Windows.
This is a common misconception. There are parts of Win32 that run in ring-0, but they're not part of the kernel, they're just drivers like everything else in the executive. Of course, if your definition of 'kernel' is 'everything that runs in privileged mode' then you're right, but that's not really valid for NT.
the problem is that the damages that can be caused by running software are not necessarily proportional to the cost of that software. $10 shareware can cause as much damage as a $10K enterprise suite if it goes wrong. if you remove the EULA then you are essentially opening the whole software industry up to liability suits. this will affect open source projects much more than comercial products since comercial products will just add the cost of liability insurance to their market rate. take (american) football helmets for example, a $5 helmet might cost up to $50 in the stores, most of which is insurance. open source projects currently have no way of footing this bill so US-based OSS distros will lose much of their market advantage, especially since they're not directly in control of the quality of the various components they ship. nobody wants to invest in unmanageable risk, you'd be better off going to vegas.
ouch, if you're using GCC then you're not using ATL/WTL, and if you're writing anything more than console apps and you're not using ATL then you're typing too much.
funnily enough, Microsoft's x86 backend (the platform-specific bit) is based on technology developed for their PowerPC compiler. The IL used to be a 3-instruction machine until they switched to the tuple-based representation developed by Sin Lew (originally a Borland architecht).
Microsoft never wrote backends for Alpha/Mips, they just licensed code from the manufacturers. I'm not sure about Itanium, but they've always had close ties with the intel compiler guys so I'm sure there's plenty of intel code in there.
that's because the backend for the alpha (and mips) compilers were written mainly by their respective hardware vendors. they had small teams of contractors working at redmond to basically graft their own code generators onto microsoft's C++ front-end.
Think about it for a second. You're asking: why does a company that makes most of its money from selling hardware have a vested interest in producing software that makes peoples programs run slower?
there are many more interesting blogs from technical people at microsoft. most of the ones I read are members of the Longhorn,.NET or Visual Studio teams:
Slashdot Mirror
you don't need to download anything in order to enable the firewall on XP. unless there are some exploits that circumvent the firewall you can easily and safely connect to the internet and visit windows update...
or you can use rkill.exe from the Resource Kit (eg, 'rkill /nkill \\computer game*')
I'm not sure what you mean by 'forced incompatibilities'. Are you saying that it's impossible for two mac users to be 'compatible' without using Microsoft products? If not then that sounds like an option to me.
The rest of your argument seems to revolve around your inability to interoperate in a non-windows world, but as far as I can tell there's no technical or logistical reason (beyond the stubbornness of others) that this is so.
My point is that if you wanted to go totally non-Microsoft then you could, you have the option, nobody's forcing you to use their products. Sure, it may be inconveient for you if you don't, but that's your problem/fault, not theirs.
well, your statement quoted above would seem to imply that a market that's not open would not provide options. given that there are options, your statement would seem to be saying that the market is open. maybe you should reword your statement?
- HP
- Apple
- Sun
- Penguincomputing
- pogolinux
(among others) ?the problem is that the damages that can be caused by running software are not necessarily proportional to the cost of that software. $10 shareware can cause as much damage as a $10K enterprise suite if it goes wrong. if you remove the EULA then you are essentially opening the whole software industry up to liability suits. this will affect open source projects much more than comercial products since comercial products will just add the cost of liability insurance to their market rate. take (american) football helmets for example, a $5 helmet might cost up to $50 in the stores, most of which is insurance. open source projects currently have no way of footing this bill so US-based OSS distros will lose much of their market advantage, especially since they're not directly in control of the quality of the various components they ship. nobody wants to invest in unmanageable risk, you'd be better off going to vegas.
ouch, if you're using GCC then you're not using ATL/WTL, and if you're writing anything more than console apps and you're not using ATL then you're typing too much.
be careful typing in programs in asm. a friend of mine did this once and only after he'd run it did he find out that he'd wiped his boot sector.
Microsoft never wrote backends for Alpha/Mips, they just licensed code from the manufacturers. I'm not sure about Itanium, but they've always had close ties with the intel compiler guys so I'm sure there's plenty of intel code in there.
that's because the backend for the alpha (and mips) compilers were written mainly by their respective hardware vendors. they had small teams of contractors working at redmond to basically graft their own code generators onto microsoft's C++ front-end.
To sell more hardware?
Seriously... if you have $100,000 consider spending it on young folks.
[*: especially the NSA]
nope, i saw it for real in the south-east london yellow pages...
5) Melt.
[*: don't ask...]
doesn't our large moon also orbit the sun?
Yeah, we should pass an ammendment to the constitution: thou shalt not write non-w3c-compliant web pages.
90% of computer uses would not be able to do much Operating if you sold them a System that didn't the ability to browse the web or play media.
use WinAmp, with it's bundled Disk-Writer plugin.