and now you're left with a product full of useless code that's only purpose was to delay something that has already happened... but at the same time, there are still users of the software that rely upon that code to work, so removing it is also not an option.... and what happens when software is forced to continue including deprecated procedural code that does nothing except not break the system as long as it isn't removed? the user experience suffers.
To be pedantic, neither of those is designed to "prevent" [...] It's just something to make life significantly harder for exploit writers.
to be pedantic, life will only be significantly harder for a single exploit writer for a fixed amount of time... then the world will have access to a functioning exploit and anyone can copy it at their whim, and life is back to being significantly harder only for the architects of ASLR and DEP, who now have to explain why the preventative measures they were paid to create no longer prevent anything.
yes, really. your quotes are incomplete and out of context. i'm pointing out your lack of ethics or integrity. find the one that meets my description... there a 3, a child should have been able to do it.
i don't think the next thing you say will be any more non-ignorant that anything else you've ever said.
keep preaching and not pointing out facts. keep doing it in your signature. keep allowing individuals to treat their bodies as a responsibility of the state and not their own. you are inhuman.
Wrong. i have dozens of relatives with windows (XP, Vista, 7), and dozens more with OS X. lately most have mac laptops and keep their old windows desktops around.
i've never once been asked to fix a mac os x malware problem. i'm asked constantly to fix problems with windows malware problems... more with windows 7 every day. still NONE with OS X.
you're an idiot or a liar... your choice to use the word "imagine" when talking about your fictional reality convinces me you're a liar who is idiotic at lying. imagine if you weren't.
you partisanly or conveniently forgot to quote the next sentence in the story where it was quite obviously pointed out that THE ISSUE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTERPRETED CODE. the issue is translation, where the maintainer of the translation layer is entrusted with ultimately controlling the end user experience. apple is not willing to allow developers to trade in user experience for a non-standard development process.
you're missing the bigger picture: it's not about locking developers... it's about protecting users from developers that place ease of development or porting over user experience.
Slashdot Mirror
<schwartzenegger>it's a tumor.//
To be pedantic, neither of those is designed to "prevent" [...] It's just something to make life significantly harder for exploit writers.
to be pedantic, life will only be significantly harder for a single exploit writer for a fixed amount of time... then the world will have access to a functioning exploit and anyone can copy it at their whim, and life is back to being significantly harder only for the architects of ASLR and DEP, who now have to explain why the preventative measures they were paid to create no longer prevent anything.
i don't think the next thing you say will be any more non-ignorant that anything else you've ever said.
keep preaching and not pointing out facts. keep doing it in your signature. keep allowing individuals to treat their bodies as a responsibility of the state and not their own. you are inhuman.
you are NOTHING.
i've never once been asked to fix a mac os x malware problem. i'm asked constantly to fix problems with windows malware problems... more with windows 7 every day. still NONE with OS X.
you're an idiot or a liar... your choice to use the word "imagine" when talking about your fictional reality convinces me you're a liar who is idiotic at lying. imagine if you weren't.
you partisanly or conveniently forgot to quote the next sentence in the story where it was quite obviously pointed out that THE ISSUE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTERPRETED CODE. the issue is translation, where the maintainer of the translation layer is entrusted with ultimately controlling the end user experience. apple is not willing to allow developers to trade in user experience for a non-standard development process.
you're missing the bigger picture: it's not about locking developers... it's about protecting users from developers that place ease of development or porting over user experience.
it's not about portable code. it's about user experience... namely responsiveness, latency, and battery consumption.
you are an idiot that hides behind anonymity because you're scared to be found out to be an ignorant hypocritical liar.
you are NOTHING.