I think we should have let it become part of Iraq and then taken Iraq.
Sometimes, most of the time, I say we should stay the hell out of the middle east. It's not the "American peoples' business." Sure, there are some people in the US who have business there and so be it. Let THEM pay for their armed assistance defending their business. Why should US tax payers pay for the armed defense of their business? Do we get tax breaks or rebates? Sure, we get cheaper prices at the pump, but cheaper compared to what? I think the result of higher gas prices are well known... higher cost of employees and a shortage of the ones employers want. That would lead to more use of public transportation and/or telecommuting and all the things the oil industry dreads because it's all a reduction in the use and dependency on big oil. It all serves big oil's business interests which are:
But this is an OS for a new type and use of computing with a new type of interface. It seems unreasonable that old applications would be particularly welcome or prevalent. I can see the attraction some developers might have -- just recompile and run on RT, but this solution that all the extra crap has to go along with it which will kill the memory and processor limitations not to mention eat up power which this new type of computing has precious little of.
Their approach completely defeats the purpose of these new portable computer devices.
And as you think about it -- to have decades old vulnerabilities exploited in this "brand new OS" is almost comical... it is at least as comical as Microsoft's implementation of TCP/IP being vulnerable to the same things as the BSD TCP/IP implementation. How do these things happen? Using other/old code to do things places too much trust and adds too much blindness to all of this "software engineering." If this is engineering, then building with Lego blocks is engineering.... actually building with Lego blocks is more engineering than Microsoft's notion of software engineering.
The cruft should not need to exist for a different processor architecture running applications written for the new and different processor architecture.
And by "cruft" I mean code which is unused or unnecessary. If it is used by Office and Notepad and neither application will be present, then it is "cruft" and should be removed from a nimble and light-weight Windows.
Putty and VNC would have to be rewritten for the new environment because Windows RT is "all new" and "written from scratch" without any of this "legacy code" I have complained about which many people here deny exists.
I get that Microsoft wants to participate in certain markets. What I don't get is why they are willing to extend and even magnify their bad reputation by porting the x86 Win32 kernel to a whole new environment when they could use others. "Pride"? I don't think it's in the best interest of the shareholders to make decisions like these.
If an environment is that security sensitive, such requirements may be coming from slightly higher than local policy makers. If it is simply a way of exerting control over their environment, it is their choice. No burden of proof is required.
But I will say that at my office, we have enough business visitors and enough executive users with gadgets that we maintain three wireless networks. "Business Guest," "Employee Guest," and "Business Network." (No, those are not the network IDs, just the classifications) Business guest is for clients and other business visitors to our site. The others should be self-explanatory.
Frankly, we have more than enough trouble with just allowing business machines on our network. Users routinely do things they shouldn't do and we can't control it -- out of our hands for various reasons. So for use to put restrictions on the network is more of a feel-good effort than one truly focused on security simply because it doesn't go far enough in light of other obvious problems.
1. Down economy -- people are rethinking how much they "need" these new things
2. Lack of creativity -- companies seek to control whole classes of products through patent legislation which, hopefully enables them to slow the release of new things so that they can sell new versions of the same old sheit with a couple of new things or changes.
I don't do regular support but as the server and network engineer, I am often called upon to fill in for the regular support people.
That said, I have to explain the difference to people constantly and repeatedly, often to the same people. Ideally, you would only need to explain it once. But I don't live in an ideal world.
If only they appreciated the fact that users can use different interfaces for different purposes. If Microsoft had their way, motocycles would have steering wheels just to make the user interfaces consistent... good idea or really bad idea?
Metro "might" be a good UI for phones and handheld tablets. I say "might" because I personally don't care for it. I find it to be too simplistic and not flexible enough... but I'm a techy geek and not a good sample of what the public might appreciate. Also, my vision is excellent. I love detail. I can't speak for the rather large percentage of the population who have vision problems.
But Metro is NOT good for the desktop. It's just not.
No I won't. They will go to the universally accepted "/" for everything. Using the URL to get where they want to go. Standards are a beautiful thing because it helps users do the things they want to do consistently. UNC using "//sserver/share" would work quite nicely after that. Now their web and file browsing experiences are the same... not like they could tell the difference before.
Apple defies explanation. Apple seems to know what people want before the people know what they want. Apple is magical in that regard. Not going to deny it. I still hate Apple for other reasons and largely because they won't do the kinds of things I need them to do in order to dump MS Windows.
Apple makes it pretty damned difficult to move a business over the Mac. People WANT to move. Apple won't supply the PC support of Dell which is an important set of expectations. They just aren't ready or interested in supporting business. It's a kind of responsibility they are unwilling or uninterested in accepting.
I also hate Apple for many other reasons having to do with their locked-down-ness and all that. I find myself wanting Apple like everyone else, but they throw up just enough blocks and restrictions that I will not use them. (I have a mac mini... dust collector for now... my Wife's computer is a Mac Pro.... she uses it, but no phones or tablets here by Apple.)
So here -- I'm "out of the closet" so to speak. I want to like Apple, but they make me hate them.
In what context? In Windows Explorer? No. Case in point, we run a portal site in the office on the same server as the office file server. (I know... you don't have to say it...) So when people put "//server" in the explorer address bar, it opens a web page. When they put "\\server" it goes to the server as a file share.
If it works in some areas but not others, it's inconsistent and broken.
So you're saying that "change for the sake of change" is no longer in practice? That people no longer believe "the newest is the best"? That they aren't actually adding new value or solving any problems which exist?
So Microsoft has decided to ignore what their customers are saying and continue shoveling the S-O-S at them with new wallpaper? I'm shocked.... just shocked.
But Microsoft is correct to do so... so far... for now. Because people and business and government are still using Windows for everything from the most simple to the most mission critical of tasks with just enough incompatibility between Office versions that everyone who wants to share and exchange documents needs to upgrade their MS Office software as well. People don't know how to change. Change is risky and dangerous.
I don't want to believe that and yet, I cannot deny the pattern you describe is pretty accurate. Back in the DOS days, people were always saying "don't get even numbered releases." I guess it still holds true.
Microsoft's problem is that it just doesn't know how to do more than one thing. They want everything to look the same everywhere. Metro might be okay for phones and hand-held tablets. It's not okay for desktops. In fact, neither is Gnome Shell or whatever that monstrosity from Ubuntu is called... unity or something?
There is nothing WRONG with icons and windows and like that. Maybe there could be a better way to do it, but I don't think anyone has come up with one yet.
I remember the earlier Windows mobile attempts. Start button and all were there. PalmOS was king at the time and they couldn't wrap their heads around why. Using the technology of the day it was quite perfect. They were light, slim and effective. Microsoft comes along and starts pushing these dense, heavy bricks with ridiculously low battery life. Why?! Why does it have to look like desktop windows? Why does it have to be so heavy? It's like they only know how to do it one way and can't imagine a new one.
Even now, Microsoft struggles like hell to make something small and light. Why?!
Let's be generous saying that Win32, released in the early 90's (1993 right?) started about what? 20 years ago now? It's not the same as it was then... it's completely different... and yet somehow rather compatible with really old software. It has grown huge and slow. It has depended upon the steady growth of processor and memory speed and capacity over the years. It was not a very forward-thinking idea to follow that trend in hind-sight was it? People are still getting about the same amount of work or play done but needing a LOT more power to make it happen and it just can't scale down.
Meanwhile, Linux was also stated in the early 90's and has grown steadily as well. But it doesn't depend on any particular hardware or any particular configuraiton at all. It's a kernel and things are built around that kernel. Okay, Linux doesn't fit on a floppy any longer, but it's still light enough to run on some very modest hardware and it's proven time and time again. But not only does it scale down, it scales up as well! It's huge and it's tiny. Why is this "hobbyist" kernel from which whole OS distros are built able to do things Microsoft simply cannot?!
I'm not convinced that Microsoft can't do this. So I ask, why they are unwilling to. They have a LOT of frikken money. A LOT. Is it arrogance that they think they don't need to reboot themselves? Is it something they are lacking? Fear of change? Fear of trying something new -- the same reason there are so many movies which are just sequels and remakes of old successes? What is it?!
Windows RT shows some promise but by all things I have seen they are still thinking WinTel when they should be thinking of all new things and ideas. And like DEC Alpha, MIPS and PowerPC, support for not Wintel processors just won't live long because they want everything to "be the same." Well guess what? Users are okay with their phones and tablets not looking like their desktops. What "problem" is Microsoft looking to solve?
Microsoft simply has no idea what its customers want or need. Worse, they keep adapting what they have instead of building something entirely new. Please spare me the nonsense that one or another version of Windows was completely re-written from scratch. That's bullshit and we all know it. Even if it was re-written from scratch, it still does everything the same way it has for quite a long time with loads and loads of backward compatibility mucking things up and slowing things down.
And Microsoft still thinks it all about the user interface? Bright colors and all that? The problems are so complex it would be impossible for anyone to list them all here. But the failings are many but perhaps just a few in category: Trust, (perception of) Stability, Security, (broken new tech) Standards compliance, Exclusion of other devices and software, User Interface, Is unaware of customer needs. There could probably be a few other broad categories, but it's not hard to think of examples for each of the ones I thought of on the fly.
This is more than Microsoft can address with the new release of any one product. They are at a point at which they need to re-invent themselves. In my opinion, the only thing they have consistently done right is XBox but they keep making that slightly worse over time as they are making it all look, feel and act like Windows 8 as well. And surprise-surprise! They made an Android app to work with XBox Live! Crazy right?
It's past time for Microsoft to start over. They definitely need to dump Win32 and all that. Do it right instead of piling on thing after thing after thing for decades. Start with a hypervisor and build your new platform there and let things intermingle with Windows 7 running in another VM. DUMP DRIVE LETTERS for god's sake. Multiple file system roots is ridiculous and stupid. And please. No More backslashes!! We know why you did it. It wasn't good then and it's bad now. And it's not because I'm a Linux user I say this, it's because I support Windows all day long and I can NEVER get people to understand the difference between a backslash and a slash! And these people have been using their computers for decades. It's a failure. So when you make things all new again, don't forget to go to slashes.
Well there I go... ranting. Microsoft is simply failing and everyone else is excited about and using other things. They just don't know how to re-invest their billions and billions of dollars into themselves any longer.
I'm not warning anyone against Android. Far from it. I am exclusively Android where phones and tablets are concerned. I am simply recognizing that as markets shift, so too will attention to these devices and that despict the current lact of serious threat, you can expect things to heat up in that area as time moves forward for a variety of reasons not the least of which is the decline of use of general purpose PCs. That decline signals new concerns which I highlight in the need for storage and backup solutions.
And is anyone concerned about the lack of printing support in tablets yet?
The thing about Windows that is most annoying for users at all levels is the malware threat. Some threats can be easily identified and avoided (depending on the user) and others remain unpatched by Microsoft such as the more recent absent fix in the last patch Tuesday. This is not a problem EXCLUSIVE to Windows. But it is the one which has tarnished Microsoft's reputation and prevents it from being taken seriously in new markets.
The words "Malware" and "Android" have found themselves together in many headlines and stories in the recent past and it's no accident. Presently, most malware on android has been "self-inflicted." A few things have slipped through the Google Market (now Play Store) in the past, but Google is careful to work against the freedom of developers so as not to make their platform unattractive, but this means the threat is still present. But that doesn't prevent future threats from being discovered or developing in new updates.
And so I say, even though things are presently "better" than using a WinTel desktop or laptop, no one should depend on this always being the case and so when they move into new platforms, they should take the experiences of the past with them as lessons for the future.
Tablets can be reset to their factory condition pretty easily in most cases, but data is lost and without a way to back it all up... the cloud is an option I suppose though I don't generally approve of the idea. I'm old school though. Others are seemingly more comfortable with the idea. So contingencies seem pretty obvious for now... until malware installs itself within protected areas used for restoration.
What I am driving at is the question of whether or not a PC is needed in order to use a tablet. To me, it's not quite possible but for others, it's 'ready' as the main device so long as data backup and storage isn't really an issue.
These are all just thoughts to consider. I'm not really making a recommendation for anyone's particular case though I do say it wouldn't work for me for reasons indicated above.
Finally, someone commenting above mentions one thing that is a pretty sticky issue for some users -- keyboard input. There are devices out there. Be sure any tablet has bluetooth support AND the tablet will allow it to be used. I know it can be done with iPad and with many Android tablets but not ALL of them... read the label and ask quesitons. Cheap android tablets which do not have bluetooth are litering the shelves in discount stores everywhere.
But since we're talking about a device for an older person...? Is screen size an issue or consideration?
I'm going to go with obvious. Sex is part of who we all are at so many levels. Disney has been making billions exploiting kids and sexuality. And doesn't everyone know that keeping something away from children only makes them want it more?
Mark it read-only!! They won't be able to delete it then.
Can we be clear on this? Does "adult video" harm children? Have there been any studies on this? Really?
Let's see: Children who grow up around guns most often learn to respect and handle them properly. Children who learn early on about knives and fire early on are no longer curious about them either. And yes, "sex education courses!" Yeah, that watered-down class of PC speak is going to address all of their natural curiosities and natural insticts right?
Let's ask the question more properly shall we?
"How can I keep myself from being tossed in jail for violating some law based on presumed morality which has little basis in fact?"
P.S. When I was a kid, I saw porn. It didn't "harm me." I'm a normal guy.
To me, writing code is about expressing and organizing thought processes. Actually, so is the spoken and written language. To improve one's ability to think, improving the use of all language, written, spoken or even programming will invariably improve the process of analyzing and understanding things which fit within those frameworks.
But also, the way people speak, write and code also reflects their current thought processes. A person may or may not be open to such new ideas. Telling a person who speaks "ebonics" about this notion will not likely result in their improved use of English and will not likely result in thought or behavioral improvements. (I know, I have tried... I once attempted to correct someone saying "aks" instead of "ask" and they just hated me for it.) It would also be true of improving coding styles. A person who would be open to such improvements would already be aware of his weaknesses and address them through observation of other peoples' code examples. They wouldn't have to be told. And even if they did, they wouldn't require more than a slight nudge.
Some people want to improve themselves and others believe they are good enough or are simply already the best. There is no hope for the others.
I have little doubt that they are interested in getting a phone maker to make a phone for them. If I were to guess, they will first target the Google Nexus devices.
That is, after all, why Google exists... to make money... and why Microsoft exists as well.
I think you're quite right -- something else is at play and we're not getting the whole story. Then again, while following many cases these days, I have found that Microsoft makes some pretty unreasonable demands and exhibits unreasonable expectations of others.
We don't receive goods for our taxes. And if we did, it would not be very cost effective. Look at the social security crap. It was supposed to be like a retirement plan for everyone. Is it? It's the worst retirement plan ever and likely to be discontinued before I get a chance to collect any of the money taken from me. And taxes? I'm sorry, but the taxes collected and spent on government contracts awarded to cronies and friends of government officials do not reflect my interests most of the time. I don't care to send out money on foreign aid or military actions.
It is theft because we don't have much choice in the matter even though most of us are paying taxes we shouldn't be paying. Income taxes are supposed to be on income. Working by the hour is not income. It is an "even trade" of services and time for money. There is no income there.
I feel a bit like most people here: That Microsoft deserves it. But it somehow also feels like the wrong way if this is indeed the case as Microsoft claiims.
If Microsoft believes this is why Windows Phone isn't getting user adoption, they are mistaken. Google needs to give them less to complain about. But I have to ask why would Google let Apple do it but not Microsoft? Surely there is something different about Microsoft's approach to it. Didn't I read yesterday something about a patent infringement case between Motorola and Microsoft where Microsoft believess it has the rights to a video codec while Motorola says "no, we're not a member of the license pool" and Microsoft says "Google owns you and Google is in the pool?" I wonder if this is related somehow.
I get that this meta data is the detail claimed to be at issue, but you know... it's not as easy to complain about actual things presently being decided by the courts. Also, in the article, there was talk about Google dropping support for a proprietary protocol in favor of open standards. Why Microsoft has to complain about that I don't know. Maybe perhaps because they believe they are still the ones setting the standards.
The strength of iPhone is that the things it does, it does EXTREMELY well. And for people who just want to use what they have now and do not want new future things, iPhone is perfect.
I probably should have acknowledged that fact in the previous comment.
The way I see it, it will come down to Android in favor of iOS unless Apple loosens up the control a bit.
Lately, I have observed many mobile phone users dumping their iPhones for Androids simply because they are able to do more of what they want and that the cost in terms of access to applications lost is between "0" and "negligible." What I mean by that is initially, the quality of iPhone apps was far greater than the quality of Android apps and that the frequency of exclusively iPhone apps was fairly high. This is changing. What's more, people are more enabled with Android than they are with iPhone. There are fewer limits, for example, on what a user can do with his Bluetooth interface under Android than under iOS. There are fewer limits on external display technologies and more as well.
Apple would choose to limit the release of each new idea so that it can be a "killer feature" of the next version of the iDevice. Other makers of great ideas aren't willing to wait for Apple to do it first and so they are heading straight for Android to implement. And the proof is everywhere. For example, before I even thought about it, car stereo makers are using Android to create car computers which do everything their phones and tablets do but in a car-context meaning they can integrate with OBD2, Bluetooth devices, controls on steering wheels, heads-up displays and more.
Innovators aren't willing to wait for Apple. And since Apple fans and Apple both agree all "real innovation" begins and ends with Apple, they will go the way they went in the personal and business computer market. The word is "niche."
And what happens when it's all Linux? Well, we will see a lot of cross-platform compatibility where apps will work with the intended OS/UI but also, compatibility layers, libraries and the like will also emerge. The most unobtrusive OS/UI will win out over those which impose their idea of how things should work on the user because that will have a rather direct impact on emulated/simulated compatibility with apps meant for other OS/UIs.
I'll just sit back and wait for blowback from Apple fans now. If you are an Apple fan, please don't quote to me who is the leader in the past or present. Don't tell me about who is the most profitable company in the history of the planet earth (though I think the east india trading company might actually have been better in its prime) Speak to me of what matters to people who are presently dumping iDevices in favor of others. I have to say, I have never heard of anyone dumping Android in favor of iDevice though I am sure it may have happened in the past, but certainly not recently.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we should have let it become part of Iraq and then taken Iraq.
Sometimes, most of the time, I say we should stay the hell out of the middle east. It's not the "American peoples' business." Sure, there are some people in the US who have business there and so be it. Let THEM pay for their armed assistance defending their business. Why should US tax payers pay for the armed defense of their business? Do we get tax breaks or rebates? Sure, we get cheaper prices at the pump, but cheaper compared to what? I think the result of higher gas prices are well known... higher cost of employees and a shortage of the ones employers want. That would lead to more use of public transportation and/or telecommuting and all the things the oil industry dreads because it's all a reduction in the use and dependency on big oil. It all serves big oil's business interests which are:
1. Maintain everyone's dependence on big oil
Short list of interests right?
But this is an OS for a new type and use of computing with a new type of interface. It seems unreasonable that old applications would be particularly welcome or prevalent. I can see the attraction some developers might have -- just recompile and run on RT, but this solution that all the extra crap has to go along with it which will kill the memory and processor limitations not to mention eat up power which this new type of computing has precious little of.
Their approach completely defeats the purpose of these new portable computer devices.
And as you think about it -- to have decades old vulnerabilities exploited in this "brand new OS" is almost comical... it is at least as comical as Microsoft's implementation of TCP/IP being vulnerable to the same things as the BSD TCP/IP implementation. How do these things happen? Using other/old code to do things places too much trust and adds too much blindness to all of this "software engineering." If this is engineering, then building with Lego blocks is engineering.... actually building with Lego blocks is more engineering than Microsoft's notion of software engineering.
The cruft should not need to exist for a different processor architecture running applications written for the new and different processor architecture.
And by "cruft" I mean code which is unused or unnecessary. If it is used by Office and Notepad and neither application will be present, then it is "cruft" and should be removed from a nimble and light-weight Windows.
Putty and VNC would have to be rewritten for the new environment because Windows RT is "all new" and "written from scratch" without any of this "legacy code" I have complained about which many people here deny exists.
I get that Microsoft wants to participate in certain markets. What I don't get is why they are willing to extend and even magnify their bad reputation by porting the x86 Win32 kernel to a whole new environment when they could use others. "Pride"? I don't think it's in the best interest of the shareholders to make decisions like these.
If an environment is that security sensitive, such requirements may be coming from slightly higher than local policy makers. If it is simply a way of exerting control over their environment, it is their choice. No burden of proof is required.
But I will say that at my office, we have enough business visitors and enough executive users with gadgets that we maintain three wireless networks. "Business Guest," "Employee Guest," and "Business Network." (No, those are not the network IDs, just the classifications) Business guest is for clients and other business visitors to our site. The others should be self-explanatory.
Frankly, we have more than enough trouble with just allowing business machines on our network. Users routinely do things they shouldn't do and we can't control it -- out of our hands for various reasons. So for use to put restrictions on the network is more of a feel-good effort than one truly focused on security simply because it doesn't go far enough in light of other obvious problems.
Let's think:
1. Down economy -- people are rethinking how much they "need" these new things
2. Lack of creativity -- companies seek to control whole classes of products through patent legislation which, hopefully enables them to slow the release of new things so that they can sell new versions of the same old sheit with a couple of new things or changes.
I don't do regular support but as the server and network engineer, I am often called upon to fill in for the regular support people.
That said, I have to explain the difference to people constantly and repeatedly, often to the same people. Ideally, you would only need to explain it once. But I don't live in an ideal world.
If only they appreciated the fact that users can use different interfaces for different purposes. If Microsoft had their way, motocycles would have steering wheels just to make the user interfaces consistent... good idea or really bad idea?
Metro "might" be a good UI for phones and handheld tablets. I say "might" because I personally don't care for it. I find it to be too simplistic and not flexible enough... but I'm a techy geek and not a good sample of what the public might appreciate. Also, my vision is excellent. I love detail. I can't speak for the rather large percentage of the population who have vision problems.
But Metro is NOT good for the desktop. It's just not.
No I won't. They will go to the universally accepted "/" for everything. Using the URL to get where they want to go. Standards are a beautiful thing because it helps users do the things they want to do consistently. UNC using "//sserver/share" would work quite nicely after that. Now their web and file browsing experiences are the same... not like they could tell the difference before.
Apple defies explanation. Apple seems to know what people want before the people know what they want. Apple is magical in that regard. Not going to deny it. I still hate Apple for other reasons and largely because they won't do the kinds of things I need them to do in order to dump MS Windows.
Apple makes it pretty damned difficult to move a business over the Mac. People WANT to move. Apple won't supply the PC support of Dell which is an important set of expectations. They just aren't ready or interested in supporting business. It's a kind of responsibility they are unwilling or uninterested in accepting.
I also hate Apple for many other reasons having to do with their locked-down-ness and all that. I find myself wanting Apple like everyone else, but they throw up just enough blocks and restrictions that I will not use them. (I have a mac mini... dust collector for now... my Wife's computer is a Mac Pro.... she uses it, but no phones or tablets here by Apple.)
So here -- I'm "out of the closet" so to speak. I want to like Apple, but they make me hate them.
In what context? In Windows Explorer? No. Case in point, we run a portal site in the office on the same server as the office file server. (I know... you don't have to say it...) So when people put "//server" in the explorer address bar, it opens a web page. When they put "\\server" it goes to the server as a file share.
If it works in some areas but not others, it's inconsistent and broken.
So you're saying that "change for the sake of change" is no longer in practice? That people no longer believe "the newest is the best"? That they aren't actually adding new value or solving any problems which exist?
So Microsoft has decided to ignore what their customers are saying and continue shoveling the S-O-S at them with new wallpaper? I'm shocked.... just shocked.
But Microsoft is correct to do so... so far... for now. Because people and business and government are still using Windows for everything from the most simple to the most mission critical of tasks with just enough incompatibility between Office versions that everyone who wants to share and exchange documents needs to upgrade their MS Office software as well. People don't know how to change. Change is risky and dangerous.
I don't want to believe that and yet, I cannot deny the pattern you describe is pretty accurate. Back in the DOS days, people were always saying "don't get even numbered releases." I guess it still holds true.
Microsoft's problem is that it just doesn't know how to do more than one thing. They want everything to look the same everywhere. Metro might be okay for phones and hand-held tablets. It's not okay for desktops. In fact, neither is Gnome Shell or whatever that monstrosity from Ubuntu is called... unity or something?
There is nothing WRONG with icons and windows and like that. Maybe there could be a better way to do it, but I don't think anyone has come up with one yet.
I remember the earlier Windows mobile attempts. Start button and all were there. PalmOS was king at the time and they couldn't wrap their heads around why. Using the technology of the day it was quite perfect. They were light, slim and effective. Microsoft comes along and starts pushing these dense, heavy bricks with ridiculously low battery life. Why?! Why does it have to look like desktop windows? Why does it have to be so heavy? It's like they only know how to do it one way and can't imagine a new one.
Even now, Microsoft struggles like hell to make something small and light. Why?!
Let's be generous saying that Win32, released in the early 90's (1993 right?) started about what? 20 years ago now? It's not the same as it was then... it's completely different... and yet somehow rather compatible with really old software. It has grown huge and slow. It has depended upon the steady growth of processor and memory speed and capacity over the years. It was not a very forward-thinking idea to follow that trend in hind-sight was it? People are still getting about the same amount of work or play done but needing a LOT more power to make it happen and it just can't scale down.
Meanwhile, Linux was also stated in the early 90's and has grown steadily as well. But it doesn't depend on any particular hardware or any particular configuraiton at all. It's a kernel and things are built around that kernel. Okay, Linux doesn't fit on a floppy any longer, but it's still light enough to run on some very modest hardware and it's proven time and time again. But not only does it scale down, it scales up as well! It's huge and it's tiny. Why is this "hobbyist" kernel from which whole OS distros are built able to do things Microsoft simply cannot?!
I'm not convinced that Microsoft can't do this. So I ask, why they are unwilling to. They have a LOT of frikken money. A LOT. Is it arrogance that they think they don't need to reboot themselves? Is it something they are lacking? Fear of change? Fear of trying something new -- the same reason there are so many movies which are just sequels and remakes of old successes? What is it?!
Windows RT shows some promise but by all things I have seen they are still thinking WinTel when they should be thinking of all new things and ideas. And like DEC Alpha, MIPS and PowerPC, support for not Wintel processors just won't live long because they want everything to "be the same." Well guess what? Users are okay with their phones and tablets not looking like their desktops. What "problem" is Microsoft looking to solve?
Microsoft simply has no idea what its customers want or need. Worse, they keep adapting what they have instead of building something entirely new. Please spare me the nonsense that one or another version of Windows was completely re-written from scratch. That's bullshit and we all know it. Even if it was re-written from scratch, it still does everything the same way it has for quite a long time with loads and loads of backward compatibility mucking things up and slowing things down.
And Microsoft still thinks it all about the user interface? Bright colors and all that? The problems are so complex it would be impossible for anyone to list them all here. But the failings are many but perhaps just a few in category: Trust, (perception of) Stability, Security, (broken new tech) Standards compliance, Exclusion of other devices and software, User Interface, Is unaware of customer needs. There could probably be a few other broad categories, but it's not hard to think of examples for each of the ones I thought of on the fly.
This is more than Microsoft can address with the new release of any one product. They are at a point at which they need to re-invent themselves. In my opinion, the only thing they have consistently done right is XBox but they keep making that slightly worse over time as they are making it all look, feel and act like Windows 8 as well. And surprise-surprise! They made an Android app to work with XBox Live! Crazy right?
It's past time for Microsoft to start over. They definitely need to dump Win32 and all that. Do it right instead of piling on thing after thing after thing for decades. Start with a hypervisor and build your new platform there and let things intermingle with Windows 7 running in another VM. DUMP DRIVE LETTERS for god's sake. Multiple file system roots is ridiculous and stupid. And please. No More backslashes!! We know why you did it. It wasn't good then and it's bad now. And it's not because I'm a Linux user I say this, it's because I support Windows all day long and I can NEVER get people to understand the difference between a backslash and a slash! And these people have been using their computers for decades. It's a failure. So when you make things all new again, don't forget to go to slashes.
Well there I go... ranting. Microsoft is simply failing and everyone else is excited about and using other things. They just don't know how to re-invest their billions and billions of dollars into themselves any longer.
I'm not warning anyone against Android. Far from it. I am exclusively Android where phones and tablets are concerned. I am simply recognizing that as markets shift, so too will attention to these devices and that despict the current lact of serious threat, you can expect things to heat up in that area as time moves forward for a variety of reasons not the least of which is the decline of use of general purpose PCs. That decline signals new concerns which I highlight in the need for storage and backup solutions.
And is anyone concerned about the lack of printing support in tablets yet?
The thing about Windows that is most annoying for users at all levels is the malware threat. Some threats can be easily identified and avoided (depending on the user) and others remain unpatched by Microsoft such as the more recent absent fix in the last patch Tuesday. This is not a problem EXCLUSIVE to Windows. But it is the one which has tarnished Microsoft's reputation and prevents it from being taken seriously in new markets.
The words "Malware" and "Android" have found themselves together in many headlines and stories in the recent past and it's no accident. Presently, most malware on android has been "self-inflicted." A few things have slipped through the Google Market (now Play Store) in the past, but Google is careful to work against the freedom of developers so as not to make their platform unattractive, but this means the threat is still present. But that doesn't prevent future threats from being discovered or developing in new updates.
And so I say, even though things are presently "better" than using a WinTel desktop or laptop, no one should depend on this always being the case and so when they move into new platforms, they should take the experiences of the past with them as lessons for the future.
Tablets can be reset to their factory condition pretty easily in most cases, but data is lost and without a way to back it all up... the cloud is an option I suppose though I don't generally approve of the idea. I'm old school though. Others are seemingly more comfortable with the idea. So contingencies seem pretty obvious for now... until malware installs itself within protected areas used for restoration.
What I am driving at is the question of whether or not a PC is needed in order to use a tablet. To me, it's not quite possible but for others, it's 'ready' as the main device so long as data backup and storage isn't really an issue.
These are all just thoughts to consider. I'm not really making a recommendation for anyone's particular case though I do say it wouldn't work for me for reasons indicated above.
Finally, someone commenting above mentions one thing that is a pretty sticky issue for some users -- keyboard input. There are devices out there. Be sure any tablet has bluetooth support AND the tablet will allow it to be used. I know it can be done with iPad and with many Android tablets but not ALL of them... read the label and ask quesitons. Cheap android tablets which do not have bluetooth are litering the shelves in discount stores everywhere.
But since we're talking about a device for an older person...? Is screen size an issue or consideration?
I'm going to go with obvious. Sex is part of who we all are at so many levels. Disney has been making billions exploiting kids and sexuality. And doesn't everyone know that keeping something away from children only makes them want it more?
Mark it read-only!! They won't be able to delete it then.
Can we be clear on this? Does "adult video" harm children? Have there been any studies on this? Really?
Let's see: Children who grow up around guns most often learn to respect and handle them properly. Children who learn early on about knives and fire early on are no longer curious about them either. And yes, "sex education courses!" Yeah, that watered-down class of PC speak is going to address all of their natural curiosities and natural insticts right?
Let's ask the question more properly shall we?
"How can I keep myself from being tossed in jail for violating some law based on presumed morality which has little basis in fact?"
P.S. When I was a kid, I saw porn. It didn't "harm me." I'm a normal guy.
To me, writing code is about expressing and organizing thought processes. Actually, so is the spoken and written language. To improve one's ability to think, improving the use of all language, written, spoken or even programming will invariably improve the process of analyzing and understanding things which fit within those frameworks.
But also, the way people speak, write and code also reflects their current thought processes. A person may or may not be open to such new ideas. Telling a person who speaks "ebonics" about this notion will not likely result in their improved use of English and will not likely result in thought or behavioral improvements. (I know, I have tried... I once attempted to correct someone saying "aks" instead of "ask" and they just hated me for it.) It would also be true of improving coding styles. A person who would be open to such improvements would already be aware of his weaknesses and address them through observation of other peoples' code examples. They wouldn't have to be told. And even if they did, they wouldn't require more than a slight nudge.
Some people want to improve themselves and others believe they are good enough or are simply already the best. There is no hope for the others.
I have little doubt that they are interested in getting a phone maker to make a phone for them. If I were to guess, they will first target the Google Nexus devices.
That is, after all, why Google exists... to make money... and why Microsoft exists as well.
I think you're quite right -- something else is at play and we're not getting the whole story. Then again, while following many cases these days, I have found that Microsoft makes some pretty unreasonable demands and exhibits unreasonable expectations of others.
We don't receive goods for our taxes. And if we did, it would not be very cost effective. Look at the social security crap. It was supposed to be like a retirement plan for everyone. Is it? It's the worst retirement plan ever and likely to be discontinued before I get a chance to collect any of the money taken from me. And taxes? I'm sorry, but the taxes collected and spent on government contracts awarded to cronies and friends of government officials do not reflect my interests most of the time. I don't care to send out money on foreign aid or military actions.
It is theft because we don't have much choice in the matter even though most of us are paying taxes we shouldn't be paying. Income taxes are supposed to be on income. Working by the hour is not income. It is an "even trade" of services and time for money. There is no income there.
I feel a bit like most people here: That Microsoft deserves it. But it somehow also feels like the wrong way if this is indeed the case as Microsoft claiims.
If Microsoft believes this is why Windows Phone isn't getting user adoption, they are mistaken. Google needs to give them less to complain about. But I have to ask why would Google let Apple do it but not Microsoft? Surely there is something different about Microsoft's approach to it. Didn't I read yesterday something about a patent infringement case between Motorola and Microsoft where Microsoft believess it has the rights to a video codec while Motorola says "no, we're not a member of the license pool" and Microsoft says "Google owns you and Google is in the pool?" I wonder if this is related somehow.
I get that this meta data is the detail claimed to be at issue, but you know... it's not as easy to complain about actual things presently being decided by the courts. Also, in the article, there was talk about Google dropping support for a proprietary protocol in favor of open standards. Why Microsoft has to complain about that I don't know. Maybe perhaps because they believe they are still the ones setting the standards.
The strength of iPhone is that the things it does, it does EXTREMELY well. And for people who just want to use what they have now and do not want new future things, iPhone is perfect.
I probably should have acknowledged that fact in the previous comment.
The way I see it, it will come down to Android in favor of iOS unless Apple loosens up the control a bit.
Lately, I have observed many mobile phone users dumping their iPhones for Androids simply because they are able to do more of what they want and that the cost in terms of access to applications lost is between "0" and "negligible." What I mean by that is initially, the quality of iPhone apps was far greater than the quality of Android apps and that the frequency of exclusively iPhone apps was fairly high. This is changing. What's more, people are more enabled with Android than they are with iPhone. There are fewer limits, for example, on what a user can do with his Bluetooth interface under Android than under iOS. There are fewer limits on external display technologies and more as well.
Apple would choose to limit the release of each new idea so that it can be a "killer feature" of the next version of the iDevice. Other makers of great ideas aren't willing to wait for Apple to do it first and so they are heading straight for Android to implement. And the proof is everywhere. For example, before I even thought about it, car stereo makers are using Android to create car computers which do everything their phones and tablets do but in a car-context meaning they can integrate with OBD2, Bluetooth devices, controls on steering wheels, heads-up displays and more.
Innovators aren't willing to wait for Apple. And since Apple fans and Apple both agree all "real innovation" begins and ends with Apple, they will go the way they went in the personal and business computer market. The word is "niche."
And what happens when it's all Linux? Well, we will see a lot of cross-platform compatibility where apps will work with the intended OS/UI but also, compatibility layers, libraries and the like will also emerge. The most unobtrusive OS/UI will win out over those which impose their idea of how things should work on the user because that will have a rather direct impact on emulated/simulated compatibility with apps meant for other OS/UIs.
I'll just sit back and wait for blowback from Apple fans now. If you are an Apple fan, please don't quote to me who is the leader in the past or present. Don't tell me about who is the most profitable company in the history of the planet earth (though I think the east india trading company might actually have been better in its prime) Speak to me of what matters to people who are presently dumping iDevices in favor of others. I have to say, I have never heard of anyone dumping Android in favor of iDevice though I am sure it may have happened in the past, but certainly not recently.