I find that hard to believe since the MSDN website has been around for some 15+ years now and it's as bad as it ever was. I had the unfortunate luck to have to work on an Excel VBA project last year (I've since left the job... I got tired of living in the 80s) and when I would try to Google something related to VBA programming a Microsoft site was rarely in the first couple pages of results. I mean, VBA isn't worth the disk space it takes up (although if it actually worked, it wouldn't be too bad for very small one-off apps), but the documentation was the worst of any software development product I've ever used in 25 years. The C++/Win32/MFC/etc. documentation isn't that bad, but still... it would be nice if they'd stop making new platforms no one wants to use and properly document the ones people actually do use.
I'm with you. I thought the phrase "angry fruit salad" died with DOS, but leave it up to Microsoft to make a GUI in 2012 that looks like the worst of the 1980s.
That may be true, but then why make a big deal about it. There seems to be more to this than "Linux doesn't support all of the spiffy new features on our chip".
Or maybe the press is just being incompetent at reporting what Intel actually said. I dunno; I'm too lazy to RTFA, leave along dig up press releases.
It's funny you should mention "monopoly pricing power" since Microsoft has pre-emptively announced fire sale pricing for Windows 8. The price of Windows upgrades has not changed substantially in 20 years, which tells me that they have no confidence in their own flagship selling on its merits.
The last time I remember Windows being so cheap was when you could get Windows 3.0 for $50, which is when I and a lot of the people I knew and worked with decided to take the plunge and get Windows for the first time.
The quote in your sig almost perfectly sums up the response I was going to make. The big companies are trying to corral us into narrower and narrower "walled gardens" that appeal to smaller and smaller least common denominators, but as long as Linux exists those of us who care will still be able to do what we want.
At this point, the only reason I even run Windows is for games. Otherwise I'd run Linux on all my machines. But Windows 7 doesn't annoy me enough or get in the way enough for me to switch my main laptop. However, I figure it's likely a future version will. Meanwhile, Steam is being ported to Linux and GOG.com's wares are generally very friendly to WINE.
See, I think you're wrong. A properly-designed system should make this kind of activity unnecessary. These days it generally is, but you shouldn't need to experiment to find out how things will work.
I'm currently working on a software application that runs on Windows 2003 and I'm enjoying using it. Unfortunately, the laptops they issue have Windows 7, so I have to do my work in a VM, but the machine is powerful enough and Windows 2003 is lean enough that there's no performance issue. I'd rather just have 2003 installed on the machine itself, but it's not a bad way to work.
I don't hate using Windows 7 for the most part, although I find the networking sucks, between abysmal transfer speeds when copying to other Windows shares (or Samba shares) and the wireless sometimes kicking out and needing a reboot before it works again (and this is an OEM installs laptops)... oh, and Explorer is still a buggy, retarded, feature-weak mess, but it gets slightly less awful with each new Windows release. I figure by about 2047 it will actually be decent. But overall, Windows 7 doesn't feel like a huge downgrade from XP like Vista did.
Of course, if it weren't for games, I'd just use Linux on all my machines... and given that I go with GOG.com, Humble Bundle and Steam for my games, making the switch is becoming more and more feasible with time.
Reminds me of the Fresh Meat site generator that would make fake Fresh Meat entries that were scarcely distinguishable from the real thing. I would love to see Microsoft's data install data polluted, but they probably have ways of dealing with that. Once a machine seems to be generating an unreasonable amount of data, it would probably be flagged.
This reminds me of the DOS days when we would go in with a sector editor and change the strings inside the EXEs. (Back when Peter Norton was a software hero and not just a brand name and the Norton Utilities were the most useful tools you could have.)
"Unauthorized duplication is encouraged.", etc.
Oh, and the "Microsoft Pessimizing Compiler". Ah, the fun of being immature.
Is it Ubuntu or the underlying Debian? I'd suspect the latter. I ran Redhat back in the 90's and early 2000s, tried SuSE for a while but have been running Ubuntu, and more recently Linux Mint for a long time.
Of course, I use a lot of RHEL systems at work, but for a desktop, I prefer Debian.
And the 9994th Slashdotter to leave out NT 3, NT 4 and Windows 2000, all of which I really liked. When I finally broke down and bought Windows 95 because there was more and more software I wanted to run but couldn't, it wasn't a pleasant experience. Within a few months I switched to NT 3.51 and was happy again.
What if it turns out to be really good. Shouldn't he deserve the benefit of the doubt such that you might say in a few years, "I thought the idea of turning 'The Hobbit' into three movies was crazy, but I'm glad he did it that way because..."
I thought the idea of remaking "King Kong" yet again was really pointless, but I rented the movie from Netflix just out of curiosity and was really impressed with it.
I agree 100%. For all the flaws it did have, Jackson's interpretation of the LoTR was amazing.
Although I was a little miffed when he made Bilbo's mithral shirt into powered battle armor with built-in particle weapons. But aside from that and making Gimli into comic relief, I loved those movies.
Slashdot Mirror
What about people who worship the invention of the steam engine?
That's better than I would rate the Office apps, so I would.
Wait, a DB class requiring Access?
Isn't that specifically sanctioned against by the Geneva Convention? I certainly consider Access a crime against humanity.
I find that hard to believe since the MSDN website has been around for some 15+ years now and it's as bad as it ever was. I had the unfortunate luck to have to work on an Excel VBA project last year (I've since left the job... I got tired of living in the 80s) and when I would try to Google something related to VBA programming a Microsoft site was rarely in the first couple pages of results. I mean, VBA isn't worth the disk space it takes up (although if it actually worked, it wouldn't be too bad for very small one-off apps), but the documentation was the worst of any software development product I've ever used in 25 years. The C++/Win32/MFC/etc. documentation isn't that bad, but still... it would be nice if they'd stop making new platforms no one wants to use and properly document the ones people actually do use.
I'm with you. I thought the phrase "angry fruit salad" died with DOS, but leave it up to Microsoft to make a GUI in 2012 that looks like the worst of the 1980s.
No resource editor? Who cares, editing the resource script directly was always better than that lame editor VS always had.
That may be true, but then why make a big deal about it. There seems to be more to this than "Linux doesn't support all of the spiffy new features on our chip".
Or maybe the press is just being incompetent at reporting what Intel actually said. I dunno; I'm too lazy to RTFA, leave along dig up press releases.
It's funny you should mention "monopoly pricing power" since Microsoft has pre-emptively announced fire sale pricing for Windows 8. The price of Windows upgrades has not changed substantially in 20 years, which tells me that they have no confidence in their own flagship selling on its merits.
The last time I remember Windows being so cheap was when you could get Windows 3.0 for $50, which is when I and a lot of the people I knew and worked with decided to take the plunge and get Windows for the first time.
One has to wonder if Microsoft has been a monopoly so long they've forgotten how to do anything else.
The quote in your sig almost perfectly sums up the response I was going to make. The big companies are trying to corral us into narrower and narrower "walled gardens" that appeal to smaller and smaller least common denominators, but as long as Linux exists those of us who care will still be able to do what we want.
At this point, the only reason I even run Windows is for games. Otherwise I'd run Linux on all my machines. But Windows 7 doesn't annoy me enough or get in the way enough for me to switch my main laptop. However, I figure it's likely a future version will. Meanwhile, Steam is being ported to Linux and GOG.com's wares are generally very friendly to WINE.
Your description makes me think of a male preying mantis courting a female as she smiles demurely.
"I'm all yours, baby," she purrs as she discretely nudges the rotting heads of her former mates to the side.
I don't see how people would want to use Office on their desktops, but I guess I'm not the target customer.
And that's exactly what Linux wants you to think.
It took me quite a while to realize you meant "askew".
See, I think you're wrong. A properly-designed system should make this kind of activity unnecessary. These days it generally is, but you shouldn't need to experiment to find out how things will work.
Wow! They did all this because 30 years ago I wanted to see if a an Apple Lisa could recognize its own boot disk? Cool.
I did that myself once. I wanted to see if it was actually stupid enough to reformat its own boot disk, and sure enough... it was.
I'm currently working on a software application that runs on Windows 2003 and I'm enjoying using it. Unfortunately, the laptops they issue have Windows 7, so I have to do my work in a VM, but the machine is powerful enough and Windows 2003 is lean enough that there's no performance issue. I'd rather just have 2003 installed on the machine itself, but it's not a bad way to work.
I don't hate using Windows 7 for the most part, although I find the networking sucks, between abysmal transfer speeds when copying to other Windows shares (or Samba shares) and the wireless sometimes kicking out and needing a reboot before it works again (and this is an OEM installs laptops)... oh, and Explorer is still a buggy, retarded, feature-weak mess, but it gets slightly less awful with each new Windows release. I figure by about 2047 it will actually be decent. But overall, Windows 7 doesn't feel like a huge downgrade from XP like Vista did.
Of course, if it weren't for games, I'd just use Linux on all my machines... and given that I go with GOG.com, Humble Bundle and Steam for my games, making the switch is becoming more and more feasible with time.
Reminds me of the Fresh Meat site generator that would make fake Fresh Meat entries that were scarcely distinguishable from the real thing. I would love to see Microsoft's data install data polluted, but they probably have ways of dealing with that. Once a machine seems to be generating an unreasonable amount of data, it would probably be flagged.
This reminds me of the DOS days when we would go in with a sector editor and change the strings inside the EXEs. (Back when Peter Norton was a software hero and not just a brand name and the Norton Utilities were the most useful tools you could have.)
"Unauthorized duplication is encouraged.", etc.
Oh, and the "Microsoft Pessimizing Compiler". Ah, the fun of being immature.
I think it's cool that she's willing to try. Good for her.
Is it Ubuntu or the underlying Debian? I'd suspect the latter. I ran Redhat back in the 90's and early 2000s, tried SuSE for a while but have been running Ubuntu, and more recently Linux Mint for a long time.
Of course, I use a lot of RHEL systems at work, but for a desktop, I prefer Debian.
And the 9994th Slashdotter to leave out NT 3, NT 4 and Windows 2000, all of which I really liked. When I finally broke down and bought Windows 95 because there was more and more software I wanted to run but couldn't, it wasn't a pleasant experience. Within a few months I switched to NT 3.51 and was happy again.
What if it turns out to be really good. Shouldn't he deserve the benefit of the doubt such that you might say in a few years, "I thought the idea of turning 'The Hobbit' into three movies was crazy, but I'm glad he did it that way because..."
I thought the idea of remaking "King Kong" yet again was really pointless, but I rented the movie from Netflix just out of curiosity and was really impressed with it.
I agree 100%. For all the flaws it did have, Jackson's interpretation of the LoTR was amazing.
Although I was a little miffed when he made Bilbo's mithral shirt into powered battle armor with built-in particle weapons. But aside from that and making Gimli into comic relief, I loved those movies.