Recently when trying to figure out why my PC in the livingroom (plugged into the TV) wasn't displaying any video, I longed for a easy device I could plug into my laptop to display video... rather than have to lug a monitor out to the livingroom.
Sure enough, a company makes just such a device, the.
It does nothing for your mouse and keyboard needs, but this (I think) solves the biggest issue of your question.
While I agree with you that Windows in general and Linux are not good for embedded OS's... I must disagree with your assertion that not even Windows CE is.
Windows CE (now Windows CE.Net) is a real-time embedded OS includes more than 2 million lines of code with which a developer can customize most aspects of the system should they desire. Similar to the XP Platform Builder, you run through, choosing what components you want to add and how things will be configured... and then you build it... from source. Despite the name "Windows" in the product name, and all of the connotations of PC instability, Windows CE is a very solid and powerful platform to build on.
I agree that Windows CE (like Linux) is often more than is needed for many smaller (scale and need, not physical size)
You can find a brief write-up on Windows CE as a RTOS here.
Despite the problems involved, we will continue to use Windows for the majority of our PC based products. Yes, Linux is an alternative, and there are those here who think it is the second coming and try to use it where ever possible (thankfully not very many places). It has only been used in a couple of products here, and is not likely to be used often because of its being far harder to setup according to our needs as well as to code for. One shouldn't need a Linux guru to setup a well configured system... something that you can do in your sleep with Windows (especially XP and CE Embedded).
I can't speak for DLing, but my company still sells PC based devices that run NT4 and will continue doing so for at least another year, perhaps two. It all depends on how much continued demand there is for these products (low, but enough to keep selling them), as well as if we can continue to get licenses for NT4.
Windows 2000 Embedded style licensing (which we use on most PC based products now) is preferred, but there are issues in upgrading these devices. Of course, Windows XP Embedded just plain stinks for what we are doing, and XP Pro OEM licensing is a nightmare for a company like us (ie we would not qualify for corporate licensing and we cannot pre-activate the OS).
The difference between VNC and RDS is quite simple... you can easily change the source code of one and make it into your own malicious application.
Years ago, when I first was introduced to VNC I flew through the source code to create a modified server binary that would not show up in the system tray, did not disable the hosts background picture, and selected from a list of names that would be displayed to the OS. I admit it, this modified version had only evil purposes in mind... installing it on a friends PC... and secretly playing around with WinAmp when he was on the other side of the room... or even having a browser window pop up to goatporn.com.
The possibilities were endless, and remember, this was long before spyware and adware were the known threats they are today (even by the savvy of us back then). Sure enough, Microsoft Antispyware picks up even my modified version. I would call that a good thing for the innocent bystander who wants nothing but to keep their system running clean and efficiently... and a bad thing for those evil doers who want to steal credit card numbers or play jokes on the user.
A responsible IT person is not going to just push out every single patch that Microsoft releases to their users. If that were the case, everyone would be running SP2 now, instead of lots of companies still evaluating it for their uses.
Auto-update only works when you are too stupid to turn it off, or have a great deal of trust for the maker of it.
If we are going to quote Monty Python in true geek style... we must add code! In this case, C#...
foreach( object foo in this.Line ) {
Console.WriteLine( "Next" );
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000);
Console.WriteLine( "Crucifixion?" );
if( Console.ReadLine() == "Yes" )
{
Console.WriteLine("Good, out of the door, line on the left, one cross each.");
}
else
{ //Be made a fool of
} }
The reason that they are only going to be doing it once a month has little to do with home users and more to do with corporate ones. Most IT people I know do not have time to search out threats to their network each day and make sure everything is up to date and properly patched... instead, they do so on a schedule. In order to facilitate that, Microsoft has done the same thing. Notice that new security bulletins came out today? Mark your calendar for a month from now and you'll see a similar thing.
Yes, such a system is potentially flawed where if a major exploit is found in the wild and is running loose, taking out systems right and left, the day after Microsoft issues their advisories/patches, things could be bad. However in such a case I have little doubt they would make a special exception for those big ones.
After a week of playing GTA3 on the PC and not leaving the house, I got in my vehicle to head to the grocery store when I had the uncontrollable desire to throw the vehicle into reverse and gun it into a car behind me... then throw it into gear and take out two signs and a pedestrian... not a good feeling.
Interestingly enough, porn is also one of those areas that does a better job of exploiting the potentials of a given technology. Where else do you see the ability for multiple camera angles within a film other than in a technology demo?
At least not in a final and public state... but I bet those Microsoft engineers who built it had that 5+ years at the time... although for £17-22k... good luck drawing them away.
To quote Avery Brooks from the ~5 year old IBM commercial, "It is the year 2000 and I was promised flying cars, where are the flying cars? Where? Where? Where?"
I would argue that it is obscure... mostly because in my experience, most of those who scream about 'Big Brother' and/or 1984 have never read an Orwell book, let alone 1984.
So all of the parents and friends that Firefox fans that have been upgraded to Firefox by those who are afraid of IE and feel it is too insecure are tech savvy?
If that was the case... wouldn't they have upgraded themselves?
Yes, there are plenty of smart geeks using Firefox... as well as IE. There are also lots of not so bright people using Firefox... as well as IE (lets not get into #'s). Such a tool is still useful for those not too bright users, no matter what browser they use.
Ahh yes, the good old days... where AOL's primary response was to tack an ugly warning on each IM and e-mail window saying that "AOL will never ask you for your password or billing information."
Because you are an AC... I'm not to keen on taking your post seriously... I will reply though.
Despite your claims... I am not anti-mac, I am mac-indiferent. They've got a decent platform and pretty hardware... but I have no interest in it.
I am on the other hand, very proudly (and loudly) anti-linux. Please, do get your facts straight.
As for my comment about "seeing if it works", I would refer you to the parent post to my original one where the commenter said "Plus, at $500, geeks can afford to buy it and find out if it's easy to get their work done on it" to which I summarized it to "see if it works" which I think is a fair translation, to see if it works for them.
In the 2600 case, the court effectively ruled that linking to something illegal is illegal. In a way, like the Bush doctrine (ie "if you harbor a terrorist, you are a terrorist"). Under this ruling, places like Google and Yahoo are conceivably liable for what you can find on them (warez, child porn, etc), however as yet, they have not been taken to court over such large things... just small issues here and there.
Even $500 for a Mac is an awful lot just to see if it works.
Don't get me wrong, if true it'd be a great deal, but not one my pocketbook would be very accommodating for. And yes... this is being said by someone who owns an iPod (of course at the time I was only an intern, now I have student loans to repay!).
Re:Tell them we don't need a Mac / Linux port.
on
Trillian 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for pointing out that typo, it's fixed now. But from the looks of it I got it right once and wrong another time within the same post, oops.
I refuse to drink the stuff due to the taste and smell myself... but then I'm a horrible geek as I have nothing resembling a caffeine dependency or addiction.
Slashdot Mirror
Recently when trying to figure out why my PC in the livingroom (plugged into the TV) wasn't displaying any video, I longed for a easy device I could plug into my laptop to display video... rather than have to lug a monitor out to the livingroom.
.
Sure enough, a company makes just such a device, the
It does nothing for your mouse and keyboard needs, but this (I think) solves the biggest issue of your question.
While I agree with you that Windows in general and Linux are not good for embedded OS's... I must disagree with your assertion that not even Windows CE is.
.Net) is a real-time embedded OS includes more than 2 million lines of code with which a developer can customize most aspects of the system should they desire. Similar to the XP Platform Builder, you run through, choosing what components you want to add and how things will be configured... and then you build it... from source. Despite the name "Windows" in the product name, and all of the connotations of PC instability, Windows CE is a very solid and powerful platform to build on.
Windows CE (now Windows CE
I agree that Windows CE (like Linux) is often more than is needed for many smaller (scale and need, not physical size)
You can find a brief write-up on Windows CE as a RTOS here.
Despite the problems involved, we will continue to use Windows for the majority of our PC based products. Yes, Linux is an alternative, and there are those here who think it is the second coming and try to use it where ever possible (thankfully not very many places). It has only been used in a couple of products here, and is not likely to be used often because of its being far harder to setup according to our needs as well as to code for. One shouldn't need a Linux guru to setup a well configured system... something that you can do in your sleep with Windows (especially XP and CE Embedded).
Besides, Linux is not that great of an embedded OS.
I can't speak for DLing, but my company still sells PC based devices that run NT4 and will continue doing so for at least another year, perhaps two. It all depends on how much continued demand there is for these products (low, but enough to keep selling them), as well as if we can continue to get licenses for NT4.
Windows 2000 Embedded style licensing (which we use on most PC based products now) is preferred, but there are issues in upgrading these devices. Of course, Windows XP Embedded just plain stinks for what we are doing, and XP Pro OEM licensing is a nightmare for a company like us (ie we would not qualify for corporate licensing and we cannot pre-activate the OS).
The difference between VNC and RDS is quite simple... you can easily change the source code of one and make it into your own malicious application.
Years ago, when I first was introduced to VNC I flew through the source code to create a modified server binary that would not show up in the system tray, did not disable the hosts background picture, and selected from a list of names that would be displayed to the OS. I admit it, this modified version had only evil purposes in mind... installing it on a friends PC... and secretly playing around with WinAmp when he was on the other side of the room... or even having a browser window pop up to goatporn.com.
The possibilities were endless, and remember, this was long before spyware and adware were the known threats they are today (even by the savvy of us back then). Sure enough, Microsoft Antispyware picks up even my modified version. I would call that a good thing for the innocent bystander who wants nothing but to keep their system running clean and efficiently... and a bad thing for those evil doers who want to steal credit card numbers or play jokes on the user.
A responsible IT person is not going to just push out every single patch that Microsoft releases to their users. If that were the case, everyone would be running SP2 now, instead of lots of companies still evaluating it for their uses.
Auto-update only works when you are too stupid to turn it off, or have a great deal of trust for the maker of it.
The reason that they are only going to be doing it once a month has little to do with home users and more to do with corporate ones. Most IT people I know do not have time to search out threats to their network each day and make sure everything is up to date and properly patched... instead, they do so on a schedule. In order to facilitate that, Microsoft has done the same thing. Notice that new security bulletins came out today? Mark your calendar for a month from now and you'll see a similar thing.
Yes, such a system is potentially flawed where if a major exploit is found in the wild and is running loose, taking out systems right and left, the day after Microsoft issues their advisories/patches, things could be bad. However in such a case I have little doubt they would make a special exception for those big ones.
Please tell me that crucifixion will be a possible penalty should/when/if they are convicted.
After a week of playing GTA3 on the PC and not leaving the house, I got in my vehicle to head to the grocery store when I had the uncontrollable desire to throw the vehicle into reverse and gun it into a car behind me... then throw it into gear and take out two signs and a pedestrian... not a good feeling.
Interestingly enough, porn is also one of those areas that does a better job of exploiting the potentials of a given technology. Where else do you see the ability for multiple camera angles within a film other than in a technology demo?
and .NET hadn't even existed for 5 Years
At least not in a final and public state... but I bet those Microsoft engineers who built it had that 5+ years at the time... although for £17-22k... good luck drawing them away.
To quote Avery Brooks from the ~5 year old IBM commercial, "It is the year 2000 and I was promised flying cars, where are the flying cars? Where? Where? Where?"
So... my friends massive porn collection is illegal?
I am still quite content with my MSFT holdings... and the $3/share dividend in December sure made me even more content.
I would argue that it is obscure... mostly because in my experience, most of those who scream about 'Big Brother' and/or 1984 have never read an Orwell book, let alone 1984.
And it is impossible for spyware or viruses to target Linux or Firefox?
Lets go through the list of disasters we don't have on the east side of the state, nor have any risk of.
Volcano... See #2
I will admit though... we do live in fear of the day or former governor gets behind the wheel again.
So all of the parents and friends that Firefox fans that have been upgraded to Firefox by those who are afraid of IE and feel it is too insecure are tech savvy?
If that was the case... wouldn't they have upgraded themselves?
Yes, there are plenty of smart geeks using Firefox... as well as IE. There are also lots of not so bright people using Firefox... as well as IE (lets not get into #'s). Such a tool is still useful for those not too bright users, no matter what browser they use.
Ahh yes, the good old days... where AOL's primary response was to tack an ugly warning on each IM and e-mail window saying that "AOL will never ask you for your password or billing information."
Because you are an AC... I'm not to keen on taking your post seriously... I will reply though.
Despite your claims... I am not anti-mac, I am mac-indiferent. They've got a decent platform and pretty hardware... but I have no interest in it.
I am on the other hand, very proudly (and loudly) anti-linux. Please, do get your facts straight.
As for my comment about "seeing if it works", I would refer you to the parent post to my original one where the commenter said "Plus, at $500, geeks can afford to buy it and find out if it's easy to get their work done on it" to which I summarized it to "see if it works" which I think is a fair translation, to see if it works for them.
The parent has hit the nail on the head.
In the 2600 case, the court effectively ruled that linking to something illegal is illegal. In a way, like the Bush doctrine (ie "if you harbor a terrorist, you are a terrorist"). Under this ruling, places like Google and Yahoo are conceivably liable for what you can find on them (warez, child porn, etc), however as yet, they have not been taken to court over such large things... just small issues here and there.
Even $500 for a Mac is an awful lot just to see if it works.
Don't get me wrong, if true it'd be a great deal, but not one my pocketbook would be very accommodating for. And yes... this is being said by someone who owns an iPod (of course at the time I was only an intern, now I have student loans to repay!).
Thanks for pointing out that typo, it's fixed now. But from the looks of it I got it right once and wrong another time within the same post, oops.
I refuse to drink the stuff due to the taste and smell myself... but then I'm a horrible geek as I have nothing resembling a caffeine dependency or addiction.