why they can't just throw in Opera, Firefox, Chrome, Safari in a "other browsers" folder and be done with this whole mess. What is the logic from their perspective?
Because then they would be responsible for support of those browsers. Since they would ship with the product that you purchase from Microsoft, you can hold Microsoft accountable for that support.
It doesn't give you a smaller desktop. You have an app for your phone, a different app for your desktop, and yet another app for your tablet. Windows Phone and Windows RT are orphans. Do you see what I'm saying now?
Yes, I think I get what you're saying. Thank you for your clarification; perhaps I can make some of my own.
When iOS was first released (2007) it didn't run any sort of legacy programs from existing touch screen smartphones, and yet people really seemed to enjoy using those devices. When Android was first released, and was still just a phone OS, people seemed to enjoy using those devices. When the iPad first came out it could run existing iPhone apps; but even Apple said that the experience for many apps wasn't good and that app authors needed to (and still do) optimize their apps for the larger screen. There's hardly an article on the web about Android tablets that doesn't mention how there's a pithy of tablet optimized apps, and that while the tablets can run all Android apps, most of them really suck on the tablet. So I don't think that not having the ability to run legacy programs is a nail in the coffin for any new device/platform.
So right now a Windows RT computer does have limited appeal, due to not having much of an ecosystem. That was kind of my point by saying "3 years from now", the ecosystem may come. The ecosystem may come easily because if developers write apps for the Windows 8 Store (targeting desktop) the apps will also light up on Windows RT; and they will light up without any "tablet optimization" step that iOS and Android apps suffer from. The screen sizes are the same. So I think that there will be crossover soon, at least from the point of view of the end user; because they'll be able to find the same apps on a Windows RT computer as they do on their Win8 laptop/desktop.
If RT could run Phone apps, I wouldn't be typing right now.
Yes, Microsoft doesn't have a runtime that runs across Win32,.Net, WinRT, Phone and Xbox. But they do have portable assemblies which do allow for an assembly to run within.Net, WinRT, Phone and Xbox. So someone would still need a separate app/program for the different runtimes, but if the business logic is the same for all of the apps there only needs to be one portable assembly.
What does RT provide me as a consumer? As far as I can tell, it just adds complexity.
Well, iOS doesn't run legacy software and yet people seem to enjoy running it. So on day one RT will be dumb. But let's say 3 years from now when there may exist non crappy apps, you'll be able to run the same non crappy RT apps on a desktop as well as a portable device.
As long as their system is working, they don't want anyone to touch it.
Unfortunately these people only see the end user interface, and don't understand the backend at all. With the insecurities of XP of XP they don't understand that what they have works, until it doesn't.
There's too much backwards compatibility and code that's still be used in Vista and 7 for Microsoft to open source XP. People could go through the XP source, find bugs, and then try to see if the same bugs still exist in currently supported products.
I have quite a few robotic machines running xp, have spent tons of money developing multi threaded C++ programs for them.
Given how XP was primarily developed with single core machines the XP thread scheduler isn't that great for multi threaded apps. You get a legit fair thread scheduler with Vista and up.
I'm not familiar with.net, But I thought the purpose of it was to be cross-platform?
I always felt the purpose of.Net was to give MS devs a managed language. Either way, the purpose of C++ was to be cross platform. But a lot of C++ code has some x86/x64 specific parts, making many C++ programs difficult to port.
The main reason why I think.Net programs aren't allowed to run is because they expect "normal" computer resources and thread scheduler. But WinRT isn't designed like that at all. There is a very unfair thread scheduler that really is trying to conserve energy. While I imagine there are builds of.Net that run on ARM, Microsoft only wants apps written with the intentional limitations of WinRT running on Windows RT. I think it's less of an ARM vs. x86 issue, and more of a expectations of a general computer vs. expectations of a power conscientious appliance.
Is traders always sell if a report is released during the day, wouldn't someone always make money by buying on that day, because the market will adjust reasonably over the next few days?
The only way this will change is we have a revolution and write a new constitution.
Okay, let's have a revolution and rewrite the Constitution; what would we change that would prevent the current political problems from naturally evolving under a new constitution?
A little over a month ago I was in a hospital and noticed a work station in a hallway that was obviously setup for visitors to use. I checked it out and it was running XP. Since the OS had noticed that a user had woken it up the balloons from the task bar started fighting with each other for my attention. Norton said it was months out of date, it also said that it had 400+ issues that needed looking at (found active virus's running, or something). I half wonder if someone with mal intent setup the computer and no one questioned it being there (the IT guys must have set it up), because the hospital sure wasn't taking care of it.
I found that as I advanced in public education that higher grade level resulted in more options of which classes I could take. Plus, if we let kids only take classes they were interested in there would be significantly less personal improvement. Being challenged by something they're not interested in gives them growth opportunities.
I'm sure most kids will be carrying around some electronic device these days. Whether it's a cell phone, Nintendo DS, or iPod, they call have wireless connectivity. Would the next step be to just track what the kids are carrying anyway? That would be the best way to prevent the "have one kid carry around a bunch of ID's at the same time" trick.
These Muslims really need to get caught up on how the Western world has been working. Do they really think that the 'Age of Mockery' was started a few years ago? Pretty much the entire history of editorial cartoons (at least 300 years now), has been full of mocking. Probably even started in London. It's a perfectly fine and healthy part of society. Ever since the Enlightenment society has been doing this. These protestors are effectively protesting the idea that people can express opinions, which is kind of hypocritical given that they're free to protest it.
you hold a lottery among all people of voting age.
I can see some additional problems. I wouldn't want it to be open to all people. There are some people who are very self destructive, and I wouldn't want to be ruled by people who can't take care of themselves.
Another downside would be when a very charismatic, manipulative person gets chosen and has no check or balance in any of the other representatives. At that point the legislature becomes a one man show.
Apparently, such blatant disregard for voters is not caused by the number of parties, but by the mere existence of parties.
I don't agree that getting rid of parties is the answer. I've come up with another way to do elections, and in my thinking I saw a hole if parties were removed from the system. If we don't have parties then it would be individuals running and an individual could get voted in, but then really not stick to anything that was said during the election. If that person was part of a party, the party (ie. the people who really care about the ideals) would not let that person be their candidate again. Having parties increase the odds that the people are voting for what they think they're voting for.
Slashdot Mirror
why they can't just throw in Opera, Firefox, Chrome, Safari in a "other browsers" folder and be done with this whole mess. What is the logic from their perspective?
Because then they would be responsible for support of those browsers. Since they would ship with the product that you purchase from Microsoft, you can hold Microsoft accountable for that support.
It doesn't give you a smaller desktop. You have an app for your phone, a different app for your desktop, and yet another app for your tablet. Windows Phone and Windows RT are orphans. Do you see what I'm saying now?
Yes, I think I get what you're saying. Thank you for your clarification; perhaps I can make some of my own.
When iOS was first released (2007) it didn't run any sort of legacy programs from existing touch screen smartphones, and yet people really seemed to enjoy using those devices. When Android was first released, and was still just a phone OS, people seemed to enjoy using those devices. When the iPad first came out it could run existing iPhone apps; but even Apple said that the experience for many apps wasn't good and that app authors needed to (and still do) optimize their apps for the larger screen. There's hardly an article on the web about Android tablets that doesn't mention how there's a pithy of tablet optimized apps, and that while the tablets can run all Android apps, most of them really suck on the tablet. So I don't think that not having the ability to run legacy programs is a nail in the coffin for any new device/platform.
So right now a Windows RT computer does have limited appeal, due to not having much of an ecosystem. That was kind of my point by saying "3 years from now", the ecosystem may come. The ecosystem may come easily because if developers write apps for the Windows 8 Store (targeting desktop) the apps will also light up on Windows RT; and they will light up without any "tablet optimization" step that iOS and Android apps suffer from. The screen sizes are the same. So I think that there will be crossover soon, at least from the point of view of the end user; because they'll be able to find the same apps on a Windows RT computer as they do on their Win8 laptop/desktop.
If RT could run Phone apps, I wouldn't be typing right now.
Yes, Microsoft doesn't have a runtime that runs across Win32, .Net, WinRT, Phone and Xbox. But they do have portable assemblies which do allow for an assembly to run within .Net, WinRT, Phone and Xbox. So someone would still need a separate app/program for the different runtimes, but if the business logic is the same for all of the apps there only needs to be one portable assembly.
What does RT provide me as a consumer? As far as I can tell, it just adds complexity.
Well, iOS doesn't run legacy software and yet people seem to enjoy running it. So on day one RT will be dumb. But let's say 3 years from now when there may exist non crappy apps, you'll be able to run the same non crappy RT apps on a desktop as well as a portable device.
Turn off cellular data and turn off Wifi. Also, don't install any apps. Those steps will prevent hackers from getting control of an Android.
As long as their system is working, they don't want anyone to touch it.
Unfortunately these people only see the end user interface, and don't understand the backend at all. With the insecurities of XP of XP they don't understand that what they have works, until it doesn't.
There's too much backwards compatibility and code that's still be used in Vista and 7 for Microsoft to open source XP. People could go through the XP source, find bugs, and then try to see if the same bugs still exist in currently supported products.
And if 50% of companies are still running XP, Microsoft will be forced to keep updating it.
Microsoft's update to XP is Vista. What magical force do you think exists that can get MS to patch XP one more time?
so what do you do, other than put it behind a firewall and hope for the best.
What has ever gone wrong with the tried and true plan of 'hoping for the best'?
I have quite a few robotic machines running xp, have spent tons of money developing multi threaded C++ programs for them.
Given how XP was primarily developed with single core machines the XP thread scheduler isn't that great for multi threaded apps. You get a legit fair thread scheduler with Vista and up.
I'm not familiar with .net, But I thought the purpose of it was to be cross-platform?
I always felt the purpose of .Net was to give MS devs a managed language. Either way, the purpose of C++ was to be cross platform. But a lot of C++ code has some x86/x64 specific parts, making many C++ programs difficult to port. .Net programs aren't allowed to run is because they expect "normal" computer resources and thread scheduler. But WinRT isn't designed like that at all. There is a very unfair thread scheduler that really is trying to conserve energy. While I imagine there are builds of .Net that run on ARM, Microsoft only wants apps written with the intentional limitations of WinRT running on Windows RT. I think it's less of an ARM vs. x86 issue, and more of a expectations of a general computer vs. expectations of a power conscientious appliance.
The main reason why I think
Is traders always sell if a report is released during the day, wouldn't someone always make money by buying on that day, because the market will adjust reasonably over the next few days?
The phone could explode and burn half their face off and they'd still treat Steve Jobs like a diety
That's because now their face looks like magic!
The only way this will change is we have a revolution and write a new constitution.
Okay, let's have a revolution and rewrite the Constitution; what would we change that would prevent the current political problems from naturally evolving under a new constitution?
A little over a month ago I was in a hospital and noticed a work station in a hallway that was obviously setup for visitors to use. I checked it out and it was running XP. Since the OS had noticed that a user had woken it up the balloons from the task bar started fighting with each other for my attention. Norton said it was months out of date, it also said that it had 400+ issues that needed looking at (found active virus's running, or something). I half wonder if someone with mal intent setup the computer and no one questioned it being there (the IT guys must have set it up), because the hospital sure wasn't taking care of it.
if it isn't a "normal" computer, we don't touch it.
Who is 'we' in this case? The Board of Directors?
I found that as I advanced in public education that higher grade level resulted in more options of which classes I could take. Plus, if we let kids only take classes they were interested in there would be significantly less personal improvement. Being challenged by something they're not interested in gives them growth opportunities.
"re-designing ICS applications is not really an option". If redesigning the apps isn't an option, how would a new OS help?
I'm sure most kids will be carrying around some electronic device these days. Whether it's a cell phone, Nintendo DS, or iPod, they call have wireless connectivity. Would the next step be to just track what the kids are carrying anyway? That would be the best way to prevent the "have one kid carry around a bunch of ID's at the same time" trick.
Is the Muslim religion so weak that simply ridiculing it will ram it?
That's apparently what the Muslim leadership is teaching their followers.
These Muslims really need to get caught up on how the Western world has been working. Do they really think that the 'Age of Mockery' was started a few years ago? Pretty much the entire history of editorial cartoons (at least 300 years now), has been full of mocking. Probably even started in London. It's a perfectly fine and healthy part of society. Ever since the Enlightenment society has been doing this. These protestors are effectively protesting the idea that people can express opinions, which is kind of hypocritical given that they're free to protest it.
you hold a lottery among all people of voting age.
I can see some additional problems. I wouldn't want it to be open to all people. There are some people who are very self destructive, and I wouldn't want to be ruled by people who can't take care of themselves.
Another downside would be when a very charismatic, manipulative person gets chosen and has no check or balance in any of the other representatives. At that point the legislature becomes a one man show.
Apparently, such blatant disregard for voters is not caused by the number of parties, but by the mere existence of parties.
I don't agree that getting rid of parties is the answer. I've come up with another way to do elections, and in my thinking I saw a hole if parties were removed from the system. If we don't have parties then it would be individuals running and an individual could get voted in, but then really not stick to anything that was said during the election. If that person was part of a party, the party (ie. the people who really care about the ideals) would not let that person be their candidate again. Having parties increase the odds that the people are voting for what they think they're voting for.
What popular malware has done this?
The Sony rootkit.
Apple's policies only affect Apple hardware. Microsoft is pushing this on everyone.
Wouldn't everyone also include Apple? How is Microsoft pushing this on Apple hardware?
this could give MS and advantage on HTPCs and home servers run by noobs.
Yes, because you can see the big push Windows is giving Media Center this time around; Microsoft is totally going after that market.