I think if there's a flag in IE to work as 7, the "fix" is a communication issue, not a technical one. Nobody needs to change existing pages.
Millions of users on millions of sites aren't going to stop working - the user will simply need to switch the flag. Let's say it's ON by default (IE8 renders as 7).
Frankly, it's not different than the amount of hands-on attention they should already be giving their browsing - with filters, security levels, plugins, etc.
What people have against it is that you dont modify a standard by decreeing a new tag - especially to force "strict standards". It's highly ironic and dilbertesqe.
The estimate stands: market share erodes and slowly MS bends to meet the general market standard.
Sad, really. You're advocating flavors in technology meant for interoperability simply as a behavior of an open marketplace. There's a few other places you may want to apply this:
If the design is entirely about having a Standard then any one participant changes it by lobbying for change and accepting the results of the group decision. Without such, the standard doesn't work. You simply get mistakes, inefficiency.
IE is broken now, and they should fix it. Period. They should fix the bugs, post a FAQ about applying the fix to web pages and let the market slowly shift over. IE8 should ship with a "view as IE7" mode, off by default. Users will slowly pressure the market. Anything less is simply pandering to the mistake and making it more complex.
There's a huge issue with this: When looking at an object at any distance, your eyes adjust alignment and then focus the lens. If you have a HUD in the lens surface, the focal depth is dramatically different between the HUD and the distant object.
You can experience this now. On a bright white background, it is possible to relax your focus until any object on the surface of your lens become distinct outlines (typically, tiny pieces of debris that are washed away by your tears and blinking). To notice them, you move your eye a light distance and then stop, trying to discern if any shadows/etc are still sliding on the surface liquid. We've all experienced this sensation of trying to "look at" something like that, which causes the cascades of moving one's eyeball, thus the shape, etc.
With a HUD, I was suspect that only blurry "regions" are actually possible. Much as if you held two pens up to to your eyes and aligned them so there was one (in the same line-of-sight as your original focal point), as a the shape of the "single" pen is hopelessly blurry and useless when trying to see across the room, the HUD wouldn't be the "terminator-style" chart of information.
Really, what I'd like to see instead is augmentation of a different type: A 360 proximity sensor uses a sensitive area of your skin and various degrees of pressure to let you walk around in the dark, or to "see" behind you. Or perhaps 4 tones for the compass points in relation to your head position, allowing you to use it in a directed manner, like personal sonar or radar.
But auto-shading your contact lens would be fun. It's a rose-color world.
Grade A is just one part of a system for meat classification, regarding age check it out
The other grading system is based on marbling (prime, choice, etc). The scary stuff (hormones, growth hormone, feed content) are not part of that labeling system, sadly.
I would bet that Micky D's is not worried about the "quality" of the meat so much as the taste and quantity/cost.
The cost to your body: somewhere around eating cardboard, regardless of taste.
Man, this sounds very fun. I have no clue what they'd create in beyond the 14 days (very unlikely to survive anyway) - the idea that there will be a generation of scientists experienced with work like this is exciting!
In some years from now, some regime will pay for the experiments to continue the 14 growth into longer periods, perhaps drilling a way towards useful organs. I seriously doubt a full creature could ever result - really. But I'd certainly like to be able to graft on a tail that wasn't rejected because it used my cells as a root.
The web, as a reflection of the population as a whole, is chock full of wishful thinking about fantasies. The youtubes seemed to be clogged with "evidence" of UFOs, angels, monsters, ghosts, etc.
Frankly, it's a little disappointing to see a lack of critical thinking. I'm all for discovering amazing new things, in any topic. But defending the stories wholesale under the guise of "how can you deny all the evidence?" kinda paints a picture of cultist mentality. Somewhat scary and journalists are not immune. They just want something that sounds like a "scoop" and grab the eyeballs (and sell the ads).
SETI is a worthwhile endeavor to me, but of course they'd hold a press conference if something big didn't filter away.
You may not know this, but licensing fees start high and go up from there. It's not $100. It's many $1000's, especially given OS, database, middleware, tools, backup kits, etc.
TCO for any single product may be negligible given support costs, but if you have to pay the same on either side, why add more for licensing? Paying for licenses without knowing if the best commercial vendor is actually any better than FOSS is foolish, to me.
This is where the "cost of support" and "market availability of skillsets" argument arises for FOSS. However, this is also where commercial vendors play a delicate game: get the product in many hands so that folks are skilled with it, but hit price/feature/support point that avoids folks from simply using FOSS.
For example, college kids are much more inclined to build a server and applications on a LAMP solution than try to juggle all the fees for the MS tools, but then MS offers the "educational" pricing, or free versions of the packages, or single-user, etc. This is just so it can capture mind share and leverage it for market share.
TCO is an old topic and at the bottom, the price/feature/support points are moving all the time. Also, the skillset availability is highly geographically variable.
I disagree. Social networking tools aren't within a competitive environment, where a collective can "attack" and "disband". People can subscribe to multiple, and often do. For the most part, social networking sites are slipping from the "ease of contacting friends afar" to the "amass a myriad channels to communicate". We will arrive at saturation quite quickly I believe. Face-To-Face, hand-passed-notes, letter-through-post writing, telephone calls, cell phone, voice-chat, text-chat, email, Forums, Usenet, IM, SMS, ICQ and now Social networking "links". Whew!
There are certain aspects to each type of communication that are interesting (voice inflection, record-keeping, time-delayed, etc) - but there is no one method to rule them all,..save for telepathy.
Not quite. They have lost many things true, but I suspect the strategy here is to slowly migrate the PFS logo into the Vista/Zune world, and begin rejecting hardware that doesn't meet with the Zune/Vista level that they control alone. In other words, if nobody can match their lockdown, then they alone control the market. Yes, all of this supposes MS doesn't have to compete - so its horribly flawed.
For example, Nokia may have a PFS-compatible device, but it won't be Zune-capable anytime soon. This means Zune/Vista will act as the hub for Zune format conversions, where it will utilize all manner of strong licensing to limit conversions, through mobility and quality.
This all plays into the larger picture of securing the blessing of Big Content for the next hub: The home entertainment box that combines Vista's abilities to lockdown rights-held content with the conveniences of device-shifting (only to a zune-like or vista-like platform) and time-shifting (within the limits of Big Content's whims).
Of course, as MS finally realizes that the "one stop shop" for an OS and device that does this is already here (PVR and AAC platforms) for the majority of tech users, and slowly the nontech public are growing into it - they do several things:
- Deliver certain platforms with higher quality (the PVR-based home servers are quite easy to use and pretty)
- A marketing push about the legality of their system versus others (including the "licensing" from *nix platforms)
- A marketing push about the features of their platform (Zune is f[l]ailing to find the sweet spot each year).
- A developer tool push to ease tool creation. Silverlight will make pretty designs for these devices, much better than GDI+ stuff.
- Gentle courting of Big Content and marketing boasts about the amount of content available through their system versus others.
- Social networking tools in these platforms for audio/video creation and distribution ("squirt" is not this). More like Zune with cameras and broadcasting.
However, this all may not add up to true competitive advantage. There are other solutions in all these areas, and Big Content is shopping around for its own model as well.
Well, after reading all the comments to this end, I'll relent. MS certainly seems to have tricked the public into thinking they're trapped by these formats, when really, much as you mention, its the features that they bind themselves to.
For the 1000's of file I scan (in forensics) that are MS office formats, I see very little usage of the features that lock users in. Perhaps when they are indeed used, they're absolutely necessary, but for the majority of file, users could save as a compatible format and not worry too much about lock in. When I've done conversion projects (make everything a PDF, etc) most of the content transfer just fine, but the target system has to recreate the features.
So I waver, but lets say its a combination of format and feature.
File formats and developer platforms are part of the information revolution. To this degree, I have no clue why they'd prefer to play in-n-out with this standards concept. For the most part, if they offer a better product they get more customers. From their point of view, one could assume that by locking anything they do into any standards body is "limiting their innovative potential". Yes, this is a fallacy in most situations. Then again, only only has to look at past concepts to see antiquation: VSAM, EDI, etc.
Answering my own question somewhat: I understand that for the large contracts, MS's products need to be transparent and open to some level. However, if they simply offered an ability to :
store workflow information in open formats or native formats (chosen by default, every time, and enforceable by domain)
interop with other formats, implementing the capabilities they'd like to capture from that market's users.
...they wouldn't need to mess around with all this crap. This seems like common sense to me.
In total, why fight a file format war when lock-in is based on features, not format? MS wins the office because it crams 80% of bloat into its Office products (along with the 20% of true usability), not because people "cant get away from doc,xls and ppt".
Interesting. You decode on "personal attack" as a rebuttal to the terms of the information staging. You fail to address the actual issue in any way. In total, you reinforce the post's sentiment, rather than negating it: That spitefully subverting the process will somehow aid in its public perception.
But they're not. They're purposefully slicing their total capacity to accommodate large market players at the expense of the home consumer. Right now, the lack of "last mile fiber" is acting in their favor: They'd rather ask you to pay for the bandwidth that crowds their lines and essentially bloat out rather than upgrade the infrastructure.
That, and the vendor lock-in of the local cable companies ensures that the US is going to lag behind the rest of the western world on the bandwidth/cost scale.
Metro WiFi was a cheap way to try and beat that, and cold still work, but for now even that infrastructure is too expensive, so usage is low and service is poor. WISPs could particularly answer that, but the upstream costs need to normalize, or it just bumps the problems to the ISP level.
We've all laughed at the choice of just inane productions you guys have lambasted over the years. However, there's new choices for great commentary being made every day (skipping personal suggestions). What sort of licensing issues do you guys run up against for acquiring certain content? Is there a "sweet spot" for movies to be in for it to be worth fighting for? How do you choose?
It'll be a long time before the state feels the pain of this - its simply too good for them to pass up. MD is a host to many gov subcontractors that write *nothing but* custom code for projects. They'll feed off of the teat of subcommittee wins for those projects until nearby states figure out a way to coax those offices over the border. Probably to Delaware, which is traditionally business-friendly (although trending away).
So frankly, this simply crunches the contractor work a bit. Many feel it is just closing a loophole.
What I want to know is how does one define "customization" ? Macro? Shell script? showing someone how to download something? installing something? Eh...
Do you walk around the woods and eat all the plants? Something tells me an education into the science of things helps. Knowing your family tree is one step, and talking to them about their food issues are probably a strong suggestion of your own.
But in terms of the realm of "commonly accepted foods" you are right, we don't know if we allergic (for example) until we try a bit.
If someone wants to lose weight...they obviously have to change something. Total intake seems like a best bet initially. Trending away from higher-processed foods also seems like a good idea, since we have millions of years of evolution tuned towards us eating lesser-processed foods.
Most of the fads are borne of just so much more marketing of product, like a pill or diet book/program. Sad, really, given how tragic most westerners have turned out chasing those gimmicks: Fat and tired, watching TV 30 hours a week.
Something tells me that the delays in commuting, lost productivity from sick days (most telecommuters work while sick), parking/transportation woes, decreased morale and higher turnover, ATT will slowly report that things probably aren't so bad when a % of workers telecommute.
In fact, I fully expect to see telecommuting plans as a normal part of government recommendations for business during times of terrorism, epidemic or natural disaster. PUtting it bluntly, SBC simply doesn't know where the world is going.
"For 50 years, the advice on dieting has been very clear..."
Um, hardly. This kind of sentence attempt to draw the reader into a sense of agreement from their most-remembered anecdotes so that the rest of the premise is seen as new. But in reality, fad dieting advice is all over the map and has been since it was part of pop culture, which goes back a *long* way. Spoonful of mercury, anyone?
The only good dieting advice has been through a good understand of one's own body. Allergies, lifestyle, location, education, economics, etc all play roles in what chemicals you put in your and how you burn energy.
This book's position is just another in the lineup of positions taken about the human GI system and energy usage. There are many strategies, both workable and not. Unless you know yourself well, no change is a worthwhile change - its all so much guessing.
Additionally, one has to ask the philosophical question...is the goal to eat yummy/available food or live [potentially] longer lives? There's no one answer, really.
MS has bent over backwards trying to allow poor software using bad API's run on the slickest most modern versions. They simply don't understand that leaving behind that layer (or boxing it into a product, not an OS level) would keep them a lot less bloated.
Also, you have to understand the internals. MS has several dozen teams arguing and debating at several layers trying to crystallize software through a multi-week communications channel. Its too bad - too many cooks in the kitchen. Most of them aren't even cooks - more managers than anything.
Those are the 2 biggest issues in MS's Windows world, IMO.
Slashdot Mirror
I think if there's a flag in IE to work as 7, the "fix" is a communication issue, not a technical one. Nobody needs to change existing pages.
Millions of users on millions of sites aren't going to stop working - the user will simply need to switch the flag. Let's say it's ON by default (IE8 renders as 7).
Frankly, it's not different than the amount of hands-on attention they should already be giving their browsing - with filters, security levels, plugins, etc.
What people have against it is that you dont modify a standard by decreeing a new tag - especially to force "strict standards". It's highly ironic and dilbertesqe.
The estimate stands: market share erodes and slowly MS bends to meet the general market standard.
Sad, really. You're advocating flavors in technology meant for interoperability simply as a behavior of an open marketplace. There's a few other places you may want to apply this:
- Gas pumps
- Electrical outlets
- Railway widths
- Traffic signals
If the design is entirely about having a Standard then any one participant changes it by lobbying for change and accepting the results of the group decision. Without such, the standard doesn't work. You simply get mistakes, inefficiency.
IE is broken now, and they should fix it. Period. They should fix the bugs, post a FAQ about applying the fix to web pages and let the market slowly shift over. IE8 should ship with a "view as IE7" mode, off by default. Users will slowly pressure the market. Anything less is simply pandering to the mistake and making it more complex.
As MS abuses its market position, it erodes it.
There's a huge issue with this: When looking at an object at any distance, your eyes adjust alignment and then focus the lens. If you have a HUD in the lens surface, the focal depth is dramatically different between the HUD and the distant object.
You can experience this now. On a bright white background, it is possible to relax your focus until any object on the surface of your lens become distinct outlines (typically, tiny pieces of debris that are washed away by your tears and blinking). To notice them, you move your eye a light distance and then stop, trying to discern if any shadows/etc are still sliding on the surface liquid. We've all experienced this sensation of trying to "look at" something like that, which causes the cascades of moving one's eyeball, thus the shape, etc.
With a HUD, I was suspect that only blurry "regions" are actually possible. Much as if you held two pens up to to your eyes and aligned them so there was one (in the same line-of-sight as your original focal point), as a the shape of the "single" pen is hopelessly blurry and useless when trying to see across the room, the HUD wouldn't be the "terminator-style" chart of information.
Really, what I'd like to see instead is augmentation of a different type: A 360 proximity sensor uses a sensitive area of your skin and various degrees of pressure to let you walk around in the dark, or to "see" behind you. Or perhaps 4 tones for the compass points in relation to your head position, allowing you to use it in a directed manner, like personal sonar or radar.
But auto-shading your contact lens would be fun. It's a rose-color world.
Grade A is just one part of a system for meat classification, regarding age check it out
The other grading system is based on marbling (prime, choice, etc). The scary stuff (hormones, growth hormone, feed content) are not part of that labeling system, sadly.
I would bet that Micky D's is not worried about the "quality" of the meat so much as the taste and quantity/cost.
The cost to your body: somewhere around eating cardboard, regardless of taste.
Man, this sounds very fun. I have no clue what they'd create in beyond the 14 days (very unlikely to survive anyway) - the idea that there will be a generation of scientists experienced with work like this is exciting!
In some years from now, some regime will pay for the experiments to continue the 14 growth into longer periods, perhaps drilling a way towards useful organs. I seriously doubt a full creature could ever result - really. But I'd certainly like to be able to graft on a tail that wasn't rejected because it used my cells as a root.
The web, as a reflection of the population as a whole, is chock full of wishful thinking about fantasies. The youtubes seemed to be clogged with "evidence" of UFOs, angels, monsters, ghosts, etc.
Frankly, it's a little disappointing to see a lack of critical thinking. I'm all for discovering amazing new things, in any topic. But defending the stories wholesale under the guise of "how can you deny all the evidence?" kinda paints a picture of cultist mentality. Somewhat scary and journalists are not immune. They just want something that sounds like a "scoop" and grab the eyeballs (and sell the ads).
SETI is a worthwhile endeavor to me, but of course they'd hold a press conference if something big didn't filter away.
You may not know this, but licensing fees start high and go up from there. It's not $100. It's many $1000's, especially given OS, database, middleware, tools, backup kits, etc.
TCO for any single product may be negligible given support costs, but if you have to pay the same on either side, why add more for licensing? Paying for licenses without knowing if the best commercial vendor is actually any better than FOSS is foolish, to me.
This is where the "cost of support" and "market availability of skillsets" argument arises for FOSS. However, this is also where commercial vendors play a delicate game: get the product in many hands so that folks are skilled with it, but hit price/feature/support point that avoids folks from simply using FOSS.
For example, college kids are much more inclined to build a server and applications on a LAMP solution than try to juggle all the fees for the MS tools, but then MS offers the "educational" pricing, or free versions of the packages, or single-user, etc. This is just so it can capture mind share and leverage it for market share.
TCO is an old topic and at the bottom, the price/feature/support points are moving all the time. Also, the skillset availability is highly geographically variable.
"The Omnivore's Dilemma"
Check it out from your library. Really good read about corn's history.
I think if you continue your "off course" comments, you'll never stop stating the obvious.
by 2018, GM will be a giant empty husk of a parts supplier.
I disagree. Social networking tools aren't within a competitive environment, where a collective can "attack" and "disband". People can subscribe to multiple, and often do. For the most part, social networking sites are slipping from the "ease of contacting friends afar" to the "amass a myriad channels to communicate". We will arrive at saturation quite quickly I believe. Face-To-Face, hand-passed-notes, letter-through-post writing, telephone calls, cell phone, voice-chat, text-chat, email, Forums, Usenet, IM, SMS, ICQ and now Social networking "links". Whew!
There are certain aspects to each type of communication that are interesting (voice inflection, record-keeping, time-delayed, etc) - but there is no one method to rule them all,
Yeah, I knew you were thinking that.
Not quite. They have lost many things true, but I suspect the strategy here is to slowly migrate the PFS logo into the Vista/Zune world, and begin rejecting hardware that doesn't meet with the Zune/Vista level that they control alone. In other words, if nobody can match their lockdown, then they alone control the market. Yes, all of this supposes MS doesn't have to compete - so its horribly flawed.
For example, Nokia may have a PFS-compatible device, but it won't be Zune-capable anytime soon. This means Zune/Vista will act as the hub for Zune format conversions, where it will utilize all manner of strong licensing to limit conversions, through mobility and quality.
This all plays into the larger picture of securing the blessing of Big Content for the next hub: The home entertainment box that combines Vista's abilities to lockdown rights-held content with the conveniences of device-shifting (only to a zune-like or vista-like platform) and time-shifting (within the limits of Big Content's whims).
Of course, as MS finally realizes that the "one stop shop" for an OS and device that does this is already here (PVR and AAC platforms) for the majority of tech users, and slowly the nontech public are growing into it - they do several things:
- Deliver certain platforms with higher quality (the PVR-based home servers are quite easy to use and pretty)
- A marketing push about the legality of their system versus others (including the "licensing" from *nix platforms)
- A marketing push about the features of their platform (Zune is f[l]ailing to find the sweet spot each year).
- A developer tool push to ease tool creation. Silverlight will make pretty designs for these devices, much better than GDI+ stuff.
- Gentle courting of Big Content and marketing boasts about the amount of content available through their system versus others.
- Social networking tools in these platforms for audio/video creation and distribution ("squirt" is not this). More like Zune with cameras and broadcasting.
However, this all may not add up to true competitive advantage. There are other solutions in all these areas, and Big Content is shopping around for its own model as well.
http://morningcuppa.blogspot.com/2006/11/answer-me.html
Well, after reading all the comments to this end, I'll relent. MS certainly seems to have tricked the public into thinking they're trapped by these formats, when really, much as you mention, its the features that they bind themselves to.
For the 1000's of file I scan (in forensics) that are MS office formats, I see very little usage of the features that lock users in. Perhaps when they are indeed used, they're absolutely necessary, but for the majority of file, users could save as a compatible format and not worry too much about lock in. When I've done conversion projects (make everything a PDF, etc) most of the content transfer just fine, but the target system has to recreate the features.
So I waver, but lets say its a combination of format and feature.
Answering my own question somewhat: I understand that for the large contracts, MS's products need to be transparent and open to some level. However, if they simply offered an ability to :
In total, why fight a file format war when lock-in is based on features, not format? MS wins the office because it crams 80% of bloat into its Office products (along with the 20% of true usability), not because people "cant get away from doc,xls and ppt".
"Microsoft Silverlight. How many pieces of flair are YOU coding?"
Interesting. You decode on "personal attack" as a rebuttal to the terms of the information staging. You fail to address the actual issue in any way. In total, you reinforce the post's sentiment, rather than negating it: That spitefully subverting the process will somehow aid in its public perception.
I daresay you are the same person. Well done sir.
But they're not. They're purposefully slicing their total capacity to accommodate large market players at the expense of the home consumer. Right now, the lack of "last mile fiber" is acting in their favor: They'd rather ask you to pay for the bandwidth that crowds their lines and essentially bloat out rather than upgrade the infrastructure.
That, and the vendor lock-in of the local cable companies ensures that the US is going to lag behind the rest of the western world on the bandwidth/cost scale.
Metro WiFi was a cheap way to try and beat that, and cold still work, but for now even that infrastructure is too expensive, so usage is low and service is poor. WISPs could particularly answer that, but the upstream costs need to normalize, or it just bumps the problems to the ISP level.
We've all laughed at the choice of just inane productions you guys have lambasted over the years. However, there's new choices for great commentary being made every day (skipping personal suggestions). What sort of licensing issues do you guys run up against for acquiring certain content? Is there a "sweet spot" for movies to be in for it to be worth fighting for? How do you choose?
It'll be a long time before the state feels the pain of this - its simply too good for them to pass up. MD is a host to many gov subcontractors that write *nothing but* custom code for projects. They'll feed off of the teat of subcommittee wins for those projects until nearby states figure out a way to coax those offices over the border. Probably to Delaware, which is traditionally business-friendly (although trending away).
So frankly, this simply crunches the contractor work a bit. Many feel it is just closing a loophole.
What I want to know is how does one define "customization" ? Macro? Shell script? showing someone how to download something? installing something? Eh...
Do you walk around the woods and eat all the plants? Something tells me an education into the science of things helps. Knowing your family tree is one step, and talking to them about their food issues are probably a strong suggestion of your own.
But in terms of the realm of "commonly accepted foods" you are right, we don't know if we allergic (for example) until we try a bit.
If someone wants to lose weight...they obviously have to change something. Total intake seems like a best bet initially. Trending away from higher-processed foods also seems like a good idea, since we have millions of years of evolution tuned towards us eating lesser-processed foods.
Most of the fads are borne of just so much more marketing of product, like a pill or diet book/program. Sad, really, given how tragic most westerners have turned out chasing those gimmicks: Fat and tired, watching TV 30 hours a week.
Something tells me that the delays in commuting, lost productivity from sick days (most telecommuters work while sick), parking/transportation woes, decreased morale and higher turnover, ATT will slowly report that things probably aren't so bad when a % of workers telecommute.
In fact, I fully expect to see telecommuting plans as a normal part of government recommendations for business during times of terrorism, epidemic or natural disaster. PUtting it bluntly, SBC simply doesn't know where the world is going.
"Perhaps they shouldn't have been surprised..."
This probably explains why Pete Conrad's opinion about the "most significant thing" is a bit overrated.
"For 50 years, the advice on dieting has been very clear..."
Um, hardly. This kind of sentence attempt to draw the reader into a sense of agreement from their most-remembered anecdotes so that the rest of the premise is seen as new. But in reality, fad dieting advice is all over the map and has been since it was part of pop culture, which goes back a *long* way. Spoonful of mercury, anyone?
The only good dieting advice has been through a good understand of one's own body. Allergies, lifestyle, location, education, economics, etc all play roles in what chemicals you put in your and how you burn energy.
This book's position is just another in the lineup of positions taken about the human GI system and energy usage. There are many strategies, both workable and not. Unless you know yourself well, no change is a worthwhile change - its all so much guessing.
Additionally, one has to ask the philosophical question...is the goal to eat yummy/available food or live [potentially] longer lives? There's no one answer, really.
Two words: Backward compatibility.
MS has bent over backwards trying to allow poor software using bad API's run on the slickest most modern versions. They simply don't understand that leaving behind that layer (or boxing it into a product, not an OS level) would keep them a lot less bloated.
Also, you have to understand the internals. MS has several dozen teams arguing and debating at several layers trying to crystallize software through a multi-week communications channel. Its too bad - too many cooks in the kitchen. Most of them aren't even cooks - more managers than anything.
Those are the 2 biggest issues in MS's Windows world, IMO.