Microsoft has always maintained that it takes a good 24 hours to compile a full version of Windows from the source
And Bob Barker always claimed it took a good 24 hours to restart the Plinko machine after a contestant stopped it, but that wasn't necessarily true either...
Windows is designed primarily with 'security by obscurity' in mind.
That's a pretty strong statement to be making, considering that you've probably never seen any of Microsoft's internal project documentation... do you have any evidence, besides anecdotal, that the Windows project team ever decided to or even considered 'security by obscurity' to be a primary design goal?
Unfounded statements bother me, especially when they get modded up to +5.
Which IE patch are you referring to that "deletes features and makes it less standards compliant"?
If it was the one that removed support for http://user:pass@domain/ syntax, that actually makes IE MORE standards compliant, not less.
According to the RFCs, the URI formatting for the HTTP protocol was never supposed to allow user and password to be specified. It was a logical but non-standard extension to the RFC implemented by many browser authors, and it just kind of stuck.
With a 32-bit address space and no paging, which is about all I would expect from a last-generation microdevice, you'd run into the dreaded 2GB barrier.
Was the CF spec written with forward-looking support for devices of this magnitude, or will a new interface be necessary to make full use of these monsters?
Unless they were going to do something like stop using the "windows" term...switching instead to a name of a kind of bull. But that's just crazy talk.
Yeah, pretty much.
"Longhorn" is only the codename for the next version of Microsoft's flagship OS. Microsoft has been building on the brand recognition of "MS Windows" for nearly ten years now, they're not going to stop now unless ordered to by the courts, and even then you can't be sure.
I mean, it's not as if people run "Chicago" OS on their Intel "Yamhill" CPUs, while Apple enthusiasts crow about how superior their "Butt-Head Astronomer" systems are...
in the United States, they're dragging the case out, perhaps for years, by appealing issues in a trial that hasn't even happened
Why must the/. "editors" put a negative spin on everything Microsoft does?
Be fair. It was the submitter of the story, not the editor, that made the anti-MS comments.
Would an editor have been justified in cutting that part of the story submission before posting it, to make it seem less biased? Probably. But when has Slashdot ever claimed to be unbiased?
Take kiddie porn for example - you're saying that a hard drive full of kiddie porn images shouldn't be admissable?
How do you prove that the defendant filled up that hard drive himself, as opposed to some overzealous law enforcement agents planting the files there after the computer was seized?
Re:Bill Gates, Hall of Fame Hacker? (P.S. First Po
on
Hackers Hall of Fame
·
· Score: 1
Microsoft brought desktop computing to the home user.
And if they hadn't, someone else would have. As many Slashdotters are fond of saying, MS doesn't so much innovate, as embrace and extend good ideas that others came up with.
Do you think that if computers still consisted on thin-client-server models based on huge VAX mainframes
I realize from your reference to starting on Windows 3.1 that you're probably younger than most of us, but are you familiar with the Apple II? The Commodore Vic-20? The TRS-80 Color Computer? All of these were entirely self-contained microcomputers, and they were part of a home computer market that existed for years before Microsoft had any influence on the market.
thanks to things like Windows, Office, and MSN, modern computing has been made easy and affordable to everyone
God bless them! Without Microsoft, we'd all have to use MacOS, WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, and CompuServe instead. And that would be downright nutty.
How much is it costing when M$ releases a patch for IE (last week) and it erases all of your IE passwords?
It is a user's responsibility to remember their passwords, not the browser's. If this presents a problem for your organization, I would suggest that your computer users need more training on good security practice.
There was a time when owning a DOS machine was alternative and weird when everybody had an amiga on wich everything just worked. With PICTURES!!!!!
This must have been a regional phenomenon... where I lived, the only Amiga owners were a handful of C64/128 owners, who upgraded out of brand loyalty to Commodore as much as anything else.
Much more common, at least among the small percentage of the population that frequently used home computers back in those days, were 386s and even Macs.
so download the source and rename the application names.
I'm betting that 90% of msoffice users will not know the difference....at least, not until they email an (OO-native format) spreadsheet to someone that has MS Office and get the response "I can't open this!"
Consider the analogy of not locking your door and then coming home to find someone rummaging through your house.
In most of the cases referenced in this article, the sites hosting the sensitive data didn't just leave their doors unlocked, they brought the data outside and dumped it on the curb. If you're walking by and see something worth salvaging in what for all purposes appears to be someone's trash, do you consider it illegal to pick it up and take it with you?
How long do you figure it'll be before you physically cannot buy a cell phone and service for calls only? No games, ringtones, just battery life and an address book?
If the handset models with games and ringtones are selling for $9.99 apiece... does it even MATTER?
Do people really fabricate PCB prototypes on run-of-the-mill $199 LaserJet printers? I'd imagine that designs with sub-1/000th-inch tolerances would require a little more heavy-duty of a printing solution...
You point out the line in the Bill of Rights that protects the printing of joke currency and then we'll talk.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
if you know assembler, you can take the CPU's strengths and weaknesses into consideration while still writing readable, maintainable, "good" code.
I notice "portable" isn't on your list. Do you really think it's a good idea to write code that can only ever be run on one specific architecture? If you're lucky -- if you wrote something reliable, efficient, and useful enough to stay in use for a long time -- the code you write for x86 today will have to be executed by an x86 emulator on some futuristic new architecture tomorrow. That's not elegant. That's a crude hack.
C is still too close to the bare metal for my tastes (I have better things to worry about than tracking my own memory allocation) but at least it can be compiled into machine code for many different CPUs. Pure Assembly cannot.
the clients want their shiny new software to run this year (if not last year, or at least on 5-year old equipment), not two years hence.
It takes less time to write good code in a high-level language than in a low-level one. There are times when it's worth a programmer's effort to try to shave two instructions off a program loop in Assembly -- hardware drivers come to mind -- but for general programming, it's better to just let a compiler give its best effort at low-level optimization for you.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft has always maintained that it takes a good 24 hours to compile a full version of Windows from the source
And Bob Barker always claimed it took a good 24 hours to restart the Plinko machine after a contestant stopped it, but that wasn't necessarily true either...
Step 2) Sue Onen Source developers down the road because obviously they have studied the MS leaked source.
Onan Source developers are ALREADY in trouble for their leaks.
They need to be taught that just because a tool is available, does not make it right to use it however they see fit.
Windows is designed primarily with 'security by obscurity' in mind.
That's a pretty strong statement to be making, considering that you've probably never seen any of Microsoft's internal project documentation... do you have any evidence, besides anecdotal, that the Windows project team ever decided to or even considered 'security by obscurity' to be a primary design goal?
Unfounded statements bother me, especially when they get modded up to +5.
Getting a copy of the code at all is a breach of copyright.
IANAL, but don't copyright breaches involve distribution of materials, and not mere possession of them?
Remember, the RIAA didn't nail those children and old people for DOWNLOADING music, but rather for SHARING music they had downloaded previously.
if($campaign_contribution > 1000000) { .= $amendment;
$law
}
That can't be Perl... I can understand it!
Actually, I guess that means it can't be law either.
Nope. I'm not wrong.
From RFC 1738, sec. 3.3:
An HTTP URL takes the form:
http://<host>:<port>/<path>?<searchpart&g t;
and
No user name or password is allowed.
Pretty clear on the point, I'd say.
Which IE patch are you referring to that "deletes features and makes it less standards compliant"?
If it was the one that removed support for http://user:pass@domain/ syntax, that actually makes IE MORE standards compliant, not less.
According to the RFCs, the URI formatting for the HTTP protocol was never supposed to allow user and password to be specified. It was a logical but non-standard extension to the RFC implemented by many browser authors, and it just kind of stuck.
How do controllers address CompactFlash cards?
With a 32-bit address space and no paging, which is about all I would expect from a last-generation microdevice, you'd run into the dreaded 2GB barrier.
Was the CF spec written with forward-looking support for devices of this magnitude, or will a new interface be necessary to make full use of these monsters?
Unless they were going to do something like stop using the "windows" term...switching instead to a name of a kind of bull. But that's just crazy talk.
Yeah, pretty much.
"Longhorn" is only the codename for the next version of Microsoft's flagship OS. Microsoft has been building on the brand recognition of "MS Windows" for nearly ten years now, they're not going to stop now unless ordered to by the courts, and even then you can't be sure.
I mean, it's not as if people run "Chicago" OS on their Intel "Yamhill" CPUs, while Apple enthusiasts crow about how superior their "Butt-Head Astronomer" systems are...
Why must the
Be fair. It was the submitter of the story, not the editor, that made the anti-MS comments.
Would an editor have been justified in cutting that part of the story submission before posting it, to make it seem less biased? Probably. But when has Slashdot ever claimed to be unbiased?
U Can't Trust This
Man, this cultural reference is even older than the security flaw they just fixed...
Take kiddie porn for example - you're saying that a hard drive full of kiddie porn images shouldn't be admissable?
How do you prove that the defendant filled up that hard drive himself, as opposed to some overzealous law enforcement agents planting the files there after the computer was seized?
Microsoft brought desktop computing to the home user.
And if they hadn't, someone else would have. As many Slashdotters are fond of saying, MS doesn't so much innovate, as embrace and extend good ideas that others came up with.
Do you think that if computers still consisted on thin-client-server models based on huge VAX mainframes
I realize from your reference to starting on Windows 3.1 that you're probably younger than most of us, but are you familiar with the Apple II? The Commodore Vic-20? The TRS-80 Color Computer?
All of these were entirely self-contained microcomputers, and they were part of a home computer market that existed for years before Microsoft had any influence on the market.
thanks to things like Windows, Office, and MSN, modern computing has been made easy and affordable to everyone
God bless them! Without Microsoft, we'd all have to use MacOS, WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, and CompuServe instead. And that would be downright nutty.
How much is it costing when M$ releases a patch for IE (last week) and it erases all of your IE passwords?
It is a user's responsibility to remember their passwords, not the browser's. If this presents a problem for your organization, I would suggest that your computer users need more training on good security practice.
There was a time when owning a DOS machine was alternative and weird when everybody had an amiga on wich everything just worked. With PICTURES!!!!!
This must have been a regional phenomenon... where I lived, the only Amiga owners were a handful of C64/128 owners, who upgraded out of brand loyalty to Commodore as much as anything else.
Much more common, at least among the small percentage of the population that frequently used home computers back in those days, were 386s and even Macs.
so download the source and rename the application names.
...at least, not until they email an (OO-native format) spreadsheet to someone that has MS Office and get the response "I can't open this!"
I'm betting that 90% of msoffice users will not know the difference.
Consider the analogy of not locking your door and then coming home to find someone rummaging through your house.
In most of the cases referenced in this article, the sites hosting the sensitive data didn't just leave their doors unlocked, they brought the data outside and dumped it on the curb. If you're walking by and see something worth salvaging in what for all purposes appears to be someone's trash, do you consider it illegal to pick it up and take it with you?
How long do you figure it'll be before you physically cannot buy a cell phone and service for calls only? No games, ringtones, just battery life and an address book?
If the handset models with games and ringtones are selling for $9.99 apiece... does it even MATTER?
Um, the idea of controlling quality and maintaining old code isn't what Open Source or Free Software have traditionally been about at all.
Perhaps they should be/should have been.
Do people really fabricate PCB prototypes on run-of-the-mill $199 LaserJet printers? I'd imagine that designs with sub-1/000th-inch tolerances would require a little more heavy-duty of a printing solution...
I'd think that if the government of any country is having enough of a problem with fake money they should move to digital money.
Yeah, really... I've been paying off all my debts in Flooz instead of cash for years now.
Now let's change a couple words of your post and see what we get, shall we?
I'd think that if the government of any country is having enough of a problem with fake votes they should move to digital elections.
You point out the line in the Bill of Rights that protects the printing of joke currency and then we'll talk.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
No, it's simpler than that.
Allowing people to produce counterfeit currency is unethical. Period.
To be a book writer without ever learning how to spell properly is like trying to teach programming by starting with assembly languages.
*sheesh*
car-bu-re-tor
If you're going to stoop so low as to make a SPELLING FLAME, at least make sure you're right before making it.
if you know assembler, you can take the CPU's strengths and weaknesses into consideration while still writing readable, maintainable, "good" code.
I notice "portable" isn't on your list. Do you really think it's a good idea to write code that can only ever be run on one specific architecture?
If you're lucky -- if you wrote something reliable, efficient, and useful enough to stay in use for a long time -- the code you write for x86 today will have to be executed by an x86 emulator on some futuristic new architecture tomorrow. That's not elegant. That's a crude hack.
C is still too close to the bare metal for my tastes (I have better things to worry about than tracking my own memory allocation) but at least it can be compiled into machine code for many different CPUs. Pure Assembly cannot.
the clients want their shiny new software to run this year (if not last year, or at least on 5-year old equipment), not two years hence.
It takes less time to write good code in a high-level language than in a low-level one. There are times when it's worth a programmer's effort to try to shave two instructions off a program loop in Assembly -- hardware drivers come to mind -- but for general programming, it's better to just let a compiler give its best effort at low-level optimization for you.