Reminds me of Microsoft of old. Where they would buy competition or buy a company a competitor needs to bring their product to the market in order to hurt them. Google is turning into the new MS, as MS turned into the old IBM before.
FirefoxOS needs a good maping program to succeed and right now Google is the monopolist. Bing maps suck with Windows Phone and is one of the reasons why I didn't buy one.
Apple owns the market with music too. If you listen to music a lot on your phone than an iphone would be better than Android. Android better for those who travel. If another product ever came close and was available for all platforms say goodbye for needing a Droid.
But Google is more cool here so I wonder if it will be bashed as much?
When I created this name 12 years ago at the height of the MS jaggarnut I was prying Apple would take over. MacOSX came out and was open source too and thought nothing of good things of Apple. They were the good guys right? Boy, have things changed once they became powerfull and became more evil than Microsoft.
My opinions change as technology and the world around us rapidly change with it. Ironically I typed that about post on my Galaxy 4 which is webkit based. I am trying to warm up to Firefox again but after 3.6 and 4.0 I prefered Chrome and even IE to that pos.
IE 6 was a great browser in 2001 and I remember reading about and giving up on Netscape and early Mozilla betas at the time. Times change. It it really irritating when mobile sites insist on -webkit CSS extensions and hypocritcal webmasters who post here bash IE 6 then go on and on how modern IE 10 doesn't support animations and other shit (which by the way are webkit, not W3C standards they are refering too.) In 10 years Chrome today would be equally dreadfull and aweful trying to get it to work with a 2020 web.
Lets hope for Firefox OS and MS losening up more on Windows Phone allowing scripting so more browsers will come along. I actually hope Windows Phone takes up to at least 20% marketshare! I never thought I would say this but I want to see more competition and MS is being more forgiving than iOS and Google in its app store. I now feel comfortable with MS getting some marketshare. The competition also will force cheap ass corporations to upgrade and stop whinning.
I have IE 8 installed with toolkits to block any newer version on my windows 7 computer. Why? I am working on something that will cater to business and IE 8 is my target as these users who have invested millions simply locked into IE 8 after IE 6 and never learned their lesson of using W3C instead. Sigh. But business is business and more players out there upgrading all the time then the better.
Netscape 4 required a lot of js hacks and its css was b7ggier than even IE 6. If its possible to believe IE 6 was a breathe of fresh air to develop for in comparison! Thats pretty bad as IE 6 today is far buggy compared to a modern browser.
As late as 2010 or 2009 I wrote a piece on the dangers of Chrome as it would give webmasters a reason to make IE only sites as the mere 15% of Firefox users would be split in forcing webmasters to wonder if its worth it to make a site work with less than 10% of viewers?
Boy have things changed. IE will never come back. Phones and tablets are making up 25% of traffic. Windows Phone has 4% of that market. Webkit is the new bully on the block today.
Chrome is the most used browser outside of China. Its, not standards compliance as all the advanced css 3 are webkit specific. I wanted a cheaper Windows Phone but turned it down fo a galaxy 4 due to sites like newyorktimes not working with anything but webkit.
IE is done. Unless MS convinces those that remember trying to get IE 6 at work to render modern sites and, all the droid and IPhone users to switch it aint happening
Netscape 4 required more hacks than IE. It was a supperior browser. Also every possible browser st the turn of the century couldnt pass the acid test. Opra and webkit had quirks too. IE 6 was the better one as browsers were buggy rushed experimental products. It was 7ntil Safari a mmd firefox 1.0 did IE 6 even have close competition. You are looking at this from a lems of today.
I remember the article about MS implementing DNT by default. It was actually one of the few occasions around here where they got praised. Normally they're so anticonsumer rights they don't deserve it.
Funny what happens when you have competition. Google Chrome would become just as bad and evil if no competion were around. Same in Firefox. I was really worried a decade ago that MS would still own 90% of the market with IE 6 today, but glad Firefox was there to stop it.
Yes Apache ignores DNT by default even if the user/browser requests it. Apache claimed its users were in an uproar! Its users being advertisers, ISPs, and others. Godaddy uses Apache as well and many felt without ads the demand for hosting sites would go down and threatened to cut funding if Apache didn't ignore DNT in future releases.
TO me that is the most atrocious of all. You need to hack and edit config or.h files in the source code to get it to even respect the standard. So really you have other forces out there opting you out of DNT and opting you in to psychological manipulation from advertisers instead.
On slashdot everyone stood up for Apache for some reason and bashed MS yet again. I was under the impression rackspace offers both as well since they did buy SGI and have lots of unix hosting logically.
By default it is turned on. The web server software is opt in. Advertisers quickly threatened Apache and gave patches and they caved in. So again they win and decide for us
WOW can MS ever be the good guys here on slashdot I mean ever??
They can cure cancer and someone will bash them and find a reason it seems.
No MS never caved in. Apache did as greedy companies like Godaddy and Rackspace threatened they would go with IIS or some other web serving software if they didn't try to stomp on the will of the consumers immediately!! The standards bullshit is just that. The coders who patched it worked for advertising companies that contributed and the ISP market felt threatened customers would not be willing to pay as much to host sites if they can't generate revenue with annoying ads.
They already disabled IE10s dnt. I was surprised by the la k of outrage here but people defended the advertisers who fund apache as they hate ms more than Apache caving in to advertisers
Found memories back in the day. My favorite release was 4.12 right when 4.x was getting a little long in the tooth. Nothing seemed to work right on non server hardware after that.
Basically the corporate whigs do not care about I.T. they care about risk management and keeping their jobs is the number one priority.
In a startup environment that is different. It is risk by its nature.
Unethical about using only MS because they own stock? Ethical as you can get as they own the company and are the customer. My guess is it is probably one of those media companies MS invests in to make.WMV standard. Flash came right in and ruined that.
Money does talk and shit walk in business, but game theory in economics and finance dictate the shareholder does not always come first as everyone's priority is to keep his job. Buying software with known liabilities because some geeks on a website called Slashdot is a sure way to get shitcanned with no references FAST from clueless phb managers. There was a lady too in all the CIOmag press releases who was a SCO shill too. The PHB and directors read these.
While we know it is crap sometimes it is better not to take risks if you have a family to feed and just waste company money instead.
Should have installed FreeBSD and told them to get f**ked.
Oh, this client got rid of secureshell because it was BSD too. I tried to explain it but they heard BSD, oh that is gnu, we aint having it.
We replaced them with an inferior solution which cost $$$$, and was repackaged ssh 2.x code. Basically all free software got lumped together as the fear was if SCO can claim ownership with something who is to say Apple or someone can't do the same with secure shell?
Speak for yourself. Years ago when this same case was going on I had a client implement a no GNU policy and we replaced all our Linux systems with Windows and paid the $699 per core SCO licensing fee for Linux.
The lawyers were all over this. As a result the developers were forbidden to use GNU as it could infringe on someone elses property and it the arguments were like reading the troll posts from Slashdot.
The more this shit hits the headlines in places like CIOmag or InfoWorld.com the stronger the argument agaisnt' GNU and Linux.
No it is not... unless you run unpatched pirated XP sp 2 from 2004 with updates turned off due to a failed Windows genuine advantage tool.
Windows Vista fixed this and MS patched this for XP in 2009. IT is fud. The problem is according to the article third world countries all run the pirated version of Windows and even though MS relented with update it is so so out of date that even WIndows Update wont work in a sp2 system. I tried it in a VM. You need to manually run fixits from microsoft.com before it can even execute. Non techie users do not know what that is.
Hell in China 35% of all users still run IE 6 for that reason.
Old Linux from 2001 had a big vulnerability if you want to bash where you had to be root to use Netscape and dial out with a modem?? Seriously
The grandparent is exactly the kind of user I was referring too.:-)
They exist in the Linux world too after running Windows 98 assume NT kernels are just as crashy because that is what they remember back in the 20th century. I make a habit to always open myself to new things so I do not become like that.
In Windows you point and click and you are done. Same with MacOSX. MSI's integrate with Active directory for remote deployments via group policies. Even better Windows 7 has side by side SXS.dlls so one dll version links to the correct app while another has its seperate version.
In Linux those apps would sig-11 and core dump as a conflict would arise.
I only had one BSOD in 2.5 years with my Windows 7 system exclusing athe latest ATI drivers which had an issue with my bois after 12.10.
That is pretty stable in my book and I find this hard to believe they crash every 30 minutes. Even Windows 3.11 without protected memory on a dos kernel where one app can take down the whole damn system was not that bad.
I am not selling it all. People keep thinking I am a MS apologist or a paid shill.
Adobe is buggy but nothign compares to it as they bought all the competitors off such as Aldus.
It is better than it was and is ok now to be used on a daily basis. Not sexy or cutting edge. I do have a mild interest in Windows 8.1 as it has addressed my issues with Metro such as app stacking and having more than 1 app on the screen at a time and an improved search.
I hated that too. I could not use Chrome for over a year!
Now when I open Firefox (just started using again after version 17) I find it a waste of space for a seperate searchbar. It is funny when your brain is used to doing something one way repetitively for so long and you have a change.
IE 11 has tabs on the bottom rumor has it for Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 perhaps? But I do not use IE that much outside of work. I am saying if I had to only use IE I could use it and even enjoy it. All 3 browsers have improved tremendously. Even Firefox is not bloated anymore as I switched to IE when 4.0 came out. Even 3.6 was a slug before it.
This is why MS is frantic with yearly releases of IE and Windows to prevent another IE 6 and XP. Many out there who are familiar think it is wrong to switch simply because that is not what they do. After awhile your brain assumes its a threat of change and will look for reasons to avoid upgrading. After all you do not do it so it is wrong.
I see that now at work with I.T. departments doing a 180 resisting change because they have never done it before. Grayhairs did that stuff in the 20th century. Exchange 2003 works fine... dont touch it! etc.
I would prefer an Android based distro if anything with keyboard and mouse support. Yes it is more limited but man non server apps really reak in 2013. In 2002 KDE 2.0 rocked! Amarok rocked! Things were looking up if it were not for hardware support.
Today it has regressed to the point where I gave up and consider Linux a server technology.
That was because I was doing strange things that normal users would not do and tinkering with stuff.
Windows 7 does not get Windows rot like XP does if you have newer apps. It even includes a registry defragger. It still can get it but it is more rare and harder.
I am not saying it is a great OS. It is rather plain and corporate more like saying grits and pourage are great food. It works but if you are used to eating spam and crap than pourage is a HUGE improvement. But it has the least hassles and software works with it. It is improved where 12 years ago before XP I would say it sucks hard. Even XP which does get windows rot is an ok system.
I have been using activestate perl for over 10 years. It used to be bundled on cd if you ever bought the how to program in perl books. It comes with some nice precompiled help files too. It is a full native win32 port with +com and I think.net support. I have not touched perl in a long time so I don't know how much of.NET has been ported. They have a Unix version too so your code can go back and forth and their own distro of CPAN>
Slashdot Mirror
Thats what I was thinking.
Reminds me of Microsoft of old. Where they would buy competition or buy a company a competitor needs to bring their product to the market in order to hurt them. Google is turning into the new MS, as MS turned into the old IBM before.
FirefoxOS needs a good maping program to succeed and right now Google is the monopolist. Bing maps suck with Windows Phone and is one of the reasons why I didn't buy one.
Apple owns the market with music too. If you listen to music a lot on your phone than an iphone would be better than Android. Android better for those who travel. If another product ever came close and was available for all platforms say goodbye for needing a Droid.
But Google is more cool here so I wonder if it will be bashed as much?
Be careful what you wish for my friend.
When I created this name 12 years ago at the height of the MS jaggarnut I was prying Apple would take over. MacOSX came out and was open source too and thought nothing of good things of Apple. They were the good guys right? Boy, have things changed once they became powerfull and became more evil than Microsoft.
My opinions change as technology and the world around us rapidly change with it. Ironically I typed that about post on my Galaxy 4 which is webkit based. I am trying to warm up to Firefox again but after 3.6 and 4.0 I prefered Chrome and even IE to that pos.
IE 6 was a great browser in 2001 and I remember reading about and giving up on Netscape and early Mozilla betas at the time. Times change. It it really irritating when mobile sites insist on -webkit CSS extensions and hypocritcal webmasters who post here bash IE 6 then go on and on how modern IE 10 doesn't support animations and other shit (which by the way are webkit, not W3C standards they are refering too.) In 10 years Chrome today would be equally dreadfull and aweful trying to get it to work with a 2020 web.
Lets hope for Firefox OS and MS losening up more on Windows Phone allowing scripting so more browsers will come along. I actually hope Windows Phone takes up to at least 20% marketshare! I never thought I would say this but I want to see more competition and MS is being more forgiving than iOS and Google in its app store. I now feel comfortable with MS getting some marketshare. The competition also will force cheap ass corporations to upgrade and stop whinning.
I have IE 8 installed with toolkits to block any newer version on my windows 7 computer. Why? I am working on something that will cater to business and IE 8 is my target as these users who have invested millions simply locked into IE 8 after IE 6 and never learned their lesson of using W3C instead. Sigh. But business is business and more players out there upgrading all the time then the better.
Netscape 4 required a lot of js hacks and its css was b7ggier than even IE 6. If its possible to believe IE 6 was a breathe of fresh air to develop for in comparison! Thats pretty bad as IE 6 today is far buggy compared to a modern browser.
As late as 2010 or 2009 I wrote a piece on the dangers of Chrome as it would give webmasters a reason to make IE only sites as the mere 15% of Firefox users would be split in forcing webmasters to wonder if its worth it to make a site work with less than 10% of viewers?
Boy have things changed. IE will never come back. Phones and tablets are making up 25% of traffic. Windows Phone has 4% of that market. Webkit is the new bully on the block today.
Chrome is the most used browser outside of China. Its, not standards compliance as all the advanced css 3 are webkit specific. I wanted a cheaper Windows Phone but turned it down fo a galaxy 4 due to sites like newyorktimes not working with anything but webkit.
IE is done. Unless MS convinces those that remember trying to get IE 6 at work to render modern sites and, all the droid and IPhone users to switch it aint happening
Netscape 4 required more hacks than IE. It was a supperior browser. Also every possible browser st the turn of the century couldnt pass the acid test. Opra and webkit had quirks too. IE 6 was the better one as browsers were buggy rushed experimental products. It was 7ntil Safari a mmd firefox 1.0 did IE 6 even have close competition. You are looking at this from a lems of today.
I remember the article about MS implementing DNT by default. It was actually one of the few occasions around here where they got praised. Normally they're so anticonsumer rights they don't deserve it.
Funny what happens when you have competition. Google Chrome would become just as bad and evil if no competion were around. Same in Firefox. I was really worried a decade ago that MS would still own 90% of the market with IE 6 today, but glad Firefox was there to stop it.
Now we see a better browser
Go google past news stories last year?
Yes Apache ignores DNT by default even if the user/browser requests it. Apache claimed its users were in an uproar! Its users being advertisers, ISPs, and others. Godaddy uses Apache as well and many felt without ads the demand for hosting sites would go down and threatened to cut funding if Apache didn't ignore DNT in future releases.
TO me that is the most atrocious of all. You need to hack and edit config or .h files in the source code to get it to even respect the standard. So really you have other forces out there opting you out of DNT and opting you in to psychological manipulation from advertisers instead.
On slashdot everyone stood up for Apache for some reason and bashed MS yet again. I was under the impression rackspace offers both as well since they did buy SGI and have lots of unix hosting logically.
By default it is turned on. The web server software is opt in. Advertisers quickly threatened Apache and gave patches and they caved in. So again they win and decide for us
WOW can MS ever be the good guys here on slashdot I mean ever??
They can cure cancer and someone will bash them and find a reason it seems.
No MS never caved in. Apache did as greedy companies like Godaddy and Rackspace threatened they would go with IIS or some other web serving software if they didn't try to stomp on the will of the consumers immediately!! The standards bullshit is just that. The coders who patched it worked for advertising companies that contributed and the ISP market felt threatened customers would not be willing to pay as much to host sites if they can't generate revenue with annoying ads.
MS did nothing wrong here at all!
They already disabled IE10s dnt. I was surprised by the la k of outrage here but people defended the advertisers who fund apache as they hate ms more than Apache caving in to advertisers
Found memories back in the day. My favorite release was 4.12 right when 4.x was getting a little long in the tooth. Nothing seemed to work right on non server hardware after that.
Basically the corporate whigs do not care about I.T. they care about risk management and keeping their jobs is the number one priority.
In a startup environment that is different. It is risk by its nature.
Unethical about using only MS because they own stock? Ethical as you can get as they own the company and are the customer. My guess is it is probably one of those media companies MS invests in to make .WMV standard. Flash came right in and ruined that.
Money does talk and shit walk in business, but game theory in economics and finance dictate the shareholder does not always come first as everyone's priority is to keep his job. Buying software with known liabilities because some geeks on a website called Slashdot is a sure way to get shitcanned with no references FAST from clueless phb managers. There was a lady too in all the CIOmag press releases who was a SCO shill too. The PHB and directors read these.
While we know it is crap sometimes it is better not to take risks if you have a family to feed and just waste company money instead.
Should have installed FreeBSD and told them to get f**ked.
Oh, this client got rid of secureshell because it was BSD too. I tried to explain it but they heard BSD, oh that is gnu, we aint having it.
We replaced them with an inferior solution which cost $$$$, and was repackaged ssh 2.x code. Basically all free software got lumped together as the fear was if SCO can claim ownership with something who is to say Apple or someone can't do the same with secure shell?
Speak for yourself. Years ago when this same case was going on I had a client implement a no GNU policy and we replaced all our Linux systems with Windows and paid the $699 per core SCO licensing fee for Linux.
The lawyers were all over this. As a result the developers were forbidden to use GNU as it could infringe on someone elses property and it the arguments were like reading the troll posts from Slashdot.
The more this shit hits the headlines in places like CIOmag or InfoWorld.com the stronger the argument agaisnt' GNU and Linux.
No it is not ... unless you run unpatched pirated XP sp 2 from 2004 with updates turned off due to a failed Windows genuine advantage tool.
Windows Vista fixed this and MS patched this for XP in 2009. IT is fud. The problem is according to the article third world countries all run the pirated version of Windows and even though MS relented with update it is so so out of date that even WIndows Update wont work in a sp2 system. I tried it in a VM. You need to manually run fixits from microsoft.com before it can even execute. Non techie users do not know what that is.
Hell in China 35% of all users still run IE 6 for that reason.
Old Linux from 2001 had a big vulnerability if you want to bash where you had to be root to use Netscape and dial out with a modem?? Seriously
The grandparent is exactly the kind of user I was referring too. :-)
They exist in the Linux world too after running Windows 98 assume NT kernels are just as crashy because that is what they remember back in the 20th century. I make a habit to always open myself to new things so I do not become like that.
that is one complaint about Linux.
In Windows you point and click and you are done. Same with MacOSX. MSI's integrate with Active directory for remote deployments via group policies. Even better Windows 7 has side by side SXS .dlls so one dll version links to the correct app while another has its seperate version.
In Linux those apps would sig-11 and core dump as a conflict would arise.
I only had one BSOD in 2.5 years with my Windows 7 system exclusing athe latest ATI drivers which had an issue with my bois after 12.10.
That is pretty stable in my book and I find this hard to believe they crash every 30 minutes. Even Windows 3.11 without protected memory on a dos kernel where one app can take down the whole damn system was not that bad.
I am not selling it all. People keep thinking I am a MS apologist or a paid shill.
Adobe is buggy but nothign compares to it as they bought all the competitors off such as Aldus.
It is better than it was and is ok now to be used on a daily basis. Not sexy or cutting edge. I do have a mild interest in Windows 8.1 as it has addressed my issues with Metro such as app stacking and having more than 1 app on the screen at a time and an improved search.
I hated that too. I could not use Chrome for over a year!
Now when I open Firefox (just started using again after version 17) I find it a waste of space for a seperate searchbar. It is funny when your brain is used to doing something one way repetitively for so long and you have a change.
IE 11 has tabs on the bottom rumor has it for Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 perhaps? But I do not use IE that much outside of work. I am saying if I had to only use IE I could use it and even enjoy it. All 3 browsers have improved tremendously. Even Firefox is not bloated anymore as I switched to IE when 4.0 came out. Even 3.6 was a slug before it.
I guess people are set in their ways.
This is why MS is frantic with yearly releases of IE and Windows to prevent another IE 6 and XP. Many out there who are familiar think it is wrong to switch simply because that is not what they do. After awhile your brain assumes its a threat of change and will look for reasons to avoid upgrading. After all you do not do it so it is wrong.
I see that now at work with I.T. departments doing a 180 resisting change because they have never done it before. Grayhairs did that stuff in the 20th century. Exchange 2003 works fine ... dont touch it! etc.
Linux is here for that ... in Android.
I would prefer an Android based distro if anything with keyboard and mouse support. Yes it is more limited but man non server apps really reak in 2013. In 2002 KDE 2.0 rocked! Amarok rocked! Things were looking up if it were not for hardware support.
Today it has regressed to the point where I gave up and consider Linux a server technology.
Thats an awful amount of ram for just browsing the web and answering gmail if you ask me.
That was because I was doing strange things that normal users would not do and tinkering with stuff.
Windows 7 does not get Windows rot like XP does if you have newer apps. It even includes a registry defragger. It still can get it but it is more rare and harder.
I am not saying it is a great OS. It is rather plain and corporate more like saying grits and pourage are great food. It works but if you are used to eating spam and crap than pourage is a HUGE improvement. But it has the least hassles and software works with it. It is improved where 12 years ago before XP I would say it sucks hard. Even XP which does get windows rot is an ok system.
I have been using activestate perl for over 10 years. It used to be bundled on cd if you ever bought the how to program in perl books. It comes with some nice precompiled help files too. It is a full native win32 port with +com and I think .net support. I have not touched perl in a long time so I don't know how much of .NET has been ported. They have a Unix version too so your code can go back and forth and their own distro of CPAN>