"We feel that the Claria Corporation name will allow us to better communicate the expanding breadth of offerings that we provide to consumers and advertisers."
"We feel that the Claria Corporation name will allow us to remove the negative mark as 'the spyware company' the public has given us, in order to continue offer our software to unsuspecting customers. Our sponsors agree that this is will enhance the experience of our customer base."
I'm sorry, but then I would have to sell my $140 computer I just bought, and my applications would become incompatible with my work applications. And I doubt I can convince my boss to switch just because they're easy to use.
Hehe, keep in mind it's only a temporary desktop design not using the new Aero engine or whatever it's called. I doubt the final version will be similar to these alpha screenshots. The interesting parts to me lie in the features, not the GUI.
There's also a need to market the distributions and show that the OS can do amazing things for the desktop user that Windows currently can't... On television or something, so the average user notice. NOT in an ad on Slashdot or a computer magazine. Otherwise I doubt Linux will stand a chance in the desktop market.
Lie? Microsoft is releasing this PDC build as a first technology preview for developers to get an idea of what Longhorn will have to offer. Microsoft have also stated that they're aiming for a release in 2006.
No, this release won't be out in a year and a half. It won't be out in two years even. But no one said so either. Actually, MS explicitly told that it won't. So far, MS hasn't fooled their customers into believing Longhorn is just around the corner. They have been very careful to tell the opposite, actually.
I have no idea what is supposed to merit a major version bump in longhorn, though; I guess the new GUI rendering engine?
No:-)
Actually, all Windows releases so far with a bump in the major version number *has* been very major indeed. Compare Windows 3.x to Windows 95 with its total change of desktop metaphors, going from icons representing file "links" only to real files, or Windows NT4 to Windows 2000 with enormous changes in the OS core.
Microsoft may bump a lot of version numbers for their software unnecessary, but I wouldn't say they're doing it with their operating systems. Windows XP only got a 0.1 bump since it is only a revised version of Windows 2000 after all.
Windows Longhorn will feature radical changes in the GUI, maybe making todays' Windows XP look like Windows 3.11 in comparison. It will also offer code restructures to use the.NET API and attempt to be even more secure than Windows 2003 Server by doing this. All.NET API procedures should for example automatically do basic things like bounds checks, which C++ code seldom does.
Windows Longhorn will also feature DRM built-in, which might have large implications for the user as well.
I personally think MS is putting a lot of eggs in one basket with Longhorn. If it's a failure, MS will be hit hard by it, but with the market dominance they have, they're probably sleeping well at night anyway.
There might be a lot of "under the surface" changes in Longhorn, making Microsoft think it's worth increasing the major version number. I think parts of the OS will be rewritten to use.NET API's using managed code (i.e. more secure code with better bounds checking, etc). They'll introduce the new file system WinFS that's implemented as a layer on top of NTFS and will make working with the files on a system more like working with a database. Whatever that will mean in practice might be unknown at this point.:-) They might also introduce DRM as part of the OS, which could have all sorts of implications to the user.
So there's a lot of known and unknown features planned, and since I haven't tried a Longhorn Alpha, I don't even know exactly what's in it so far. There are of course all sorts of visual changes, and the PDC build have already revealed dozens of surprise changes like an improved Internet Explorer with for example anti-popup support, a new plugin architecture, and a new download manager, etc.
Since Windows has a lot of software integrated, it's hard to keep track of all changes, especially if you're going to do it in detail, this early. Longhorn isn't even in Beta yet.
Compared to Java, 1 and 2 are not new. 3 is new, but I don't see the point of it... 1 is only in the spec stage here, whereas for Java... 2 already exists for a long time in Java...
I wonder if someone is a Java developer or have a Java bias here.:-) Or at least someone looks at implementation of language features as a race between Microsoft and Sun...
There are some different opinions about Plug & Play, but with monitors, I think it was always a good idea. Letting monitors present themselves to Linux or whatever, along with their supported resolutions and their respective refresh rates is a good idea. But of course, this was in '96. I doubt it can still happen with today's P&P monitors. If it does and the monitors present the proper standardized information, well, then X sucks.:-P
Maybe you should change monitor, just in case some program will screw up then. Basically all current monitors won't display an image using an unsupported refresh rate, since the monitors of today need to know which refresh rates they support, to support Plug & Play.
I haven't heard about someone destroying a hard drive with that method and wouldn't be surprised if many quality hard drives of today have protective measures against that, just like those "computer parts" you mention.
What are you talking about? Do you have any particular problem you wish to see a solution for, or are you just feeling like complaining about Microsoft?
Access 2003 uses the Access 2000 file format by default, just like Access XP.
Office 2003, Office XP, Office 2000, and Office 97 (with the exception of Access) can share files, usually seamlessly.
A user report regarding this:
"I ran the 2003 beta in an office that also uses Office 97 and Office XP, and only encountered one problem with Excel that was corrected in a subsequent beta update (I'm still running the beta). I encountered no other compatibility issues. File formats remain the same, with the exception of Visio and Outlook which have slight changes to their data formats. However, both are 100% backward compatible and can be set up to run in 2002 (XP) file compatibility mode."
----
Another one:
"You don't NEED any patches. The file format is basically the same, and XP will happily open 97 files. There are plenty of legitimate reasons for bagging Microsoft, but this ain't one of them. I switch files between 97 and XP (and back) on a regular basis. This means that your problem lies somewhere else. Exactly how did you move the files from the new computer?What's the EXACT error message that you're getting when you try to open the files, and HOW are you trying to open them; through File -> Open, or through Windows Explorer? Also, you DID install the versions of Office on the new computer in the correct order didn't you? (You stated that you have both on the new computer; you need to do 97, then 2000 (if applicable), then XP; NOT XP first, then 97.)"
... and I didn't particularly look for positive comments, these were the first that came up in a Google search.
It's not like 2^128 addresses will be usable by anyone, since the total address space is divided into classes for various purposes. IIRC, the prefix part of an IPv6 address determines its class.
Yes, you can use hexadecimal numbers, and I think I'd recommend it too.:-)
There are some "address concatenation" features/rules to make IPv6 addresses shorter.
- You can skip leading zeroes. - One sequence of 16 bit blocks of zeroes can be replaced by a double colon -- "::", but not more than once.
Some examples:
- An IPv4-mapped IPv6 address:::ffff:1.2.3.4. - IPv6 address 3ffe:ffff:100:f101:0:0:0:1 becomes 3ffe:ffff:100:f101::1 in short form. - 127.0.0.1 in IPv4 (localhost), i.e. 0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0001 in IPv6, becomes::1 in shorthand form. - 0.0.0.0 in IPv4 (anyhost), i.e. 0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000 in IPv6, becomes::0.
Slashdot Mirror
.. and maybe also easy to use, yet a powerful and flexible Unix shell?
"We feel that the Claria Corporation name will allow us to better communicate the expanding breadth of offerings that we provide to consumers and advertisers."
"We feel that the Claria Corporation name will allow us to remove the negative mark as 'the spyware company' the public has given us, in order to continue offer our software to unsuspecting customers. Our sponsors agree that this is will enhance the experience of our customer base."
Nvu is for people, not geeks.
:-)
Thanks for so elegantly explaining that geeks are not a subset of humans.
These are all from the PDC build (#4051) of Longhorn:
Gallery 1
Gallery 2
Gallery 3
Whoops. Just when I thought I'd never to that again. :-P Get confused with UBB Code and miss to preview the mess.
The 20 Charisma link again...
What you say!? He has [url=http://www.theonion.com/onion3121/billgates.h tml]20 Charisma[/url]!
I'm sorry, but then I would have to sell my $140 computer I just bought, and my applications would become incompatible with my work applications. And I doubt I can convince my boss to switch just because they're easy to use.
So it has been shown that subliminal messages work now? I thought it was proven they don't.
Hehe, keep in mind it's only a temporary desktop design not using the new Aero engine or whatever it's called. I doubt the final version will be similar to these alpha screenshots. The interesting parts to me lie in the features, not the GUI.
There's also a need to market the distributions and show that the OS can do amazing things for the desktop user that Windows currently can't... On television or something, so the average user notice. NOT in an ad on Slashdot or a computer magazine. Otherwise I doubt Linux will stand a chance in the desktop market.
Lie? Microsoft is releasing this PDC build as a first technology preview for developers to get an idea of what Longhorn will have to offer. Microsoft have also stated that they're aiming for a release in 2006.
No, this release won't be out in a year and a half. It won't be out in two years even. But no one said so either. Actually, MS explicitly told that it won't. So far, MS hasn't fooled their customers into believing Longhorn is just around the corner. They have been very careful to tell the opposite, actually.
Beware. It's looking like crap at this stage. :-)
A dozen of screenshots, or so...
I have no idea what is supposed to merit a major version bump in longhorn, though; I guess the new GUI rendering engine?
:-)
.NET API and attempt to be even more secure than Windows 2003 Server by doing this. All .NET API procedures should for example automatically do basic things like bounds checks, which C++ code seldom does.
No
Actually, all Windows releases so far with a bump in the major version number *has* been very major indeed. Compare Windows 3.x to Windows 95 with its total change of desktop metaphors, going from icons representing file "links" only to real files, or Windows NT4 to Windows 2000 with enormous changes in the OS core.
Microsoft may bump a lot of version numbers for their software unnecessary, but I wouldn't say they're doing it with their operating systems. Windows XP only got a 0.1 bump since it is only a revised version of Windows 2000 after all.
Windows Longhorn will feature radical changes in the GUI, maybe making todays' Windows XP look like Windows 3.11 in comparison. It will also offer code restructures to use the
Windows Longhorn will also feature DRM built-in, which might have large implications for the user as well.
I personally think MS is putting a lot of eggs in one basket with Longhorn. If it's a failure, MS will be hit hard by it, but with the market dominance they have, they're probably sleeping well at night anyway.
There might be a lot of "under the surface" changes in Longhorn, making Microsoft think it's worth increasing the major version number. I think parts of the OS will be rewritten to use .NET API's using managed code (i.e. more secure code with better bounds checking, etc). They'll introduce the new file system WinFS that's implemented as a layer on top of NTFS and will make working with the files on a system more like working with a database. Whatever that will mean in practice might be unknown at this point. :-) They might also introduce DRM as part of the OS, which could have all sorts of implications to the user.
So there's a lot of known and unknown features planned, and since I haven't tried a Longhorn Alpha, I don't even know exactly what's in it so far. There are of course all sorts of visual changes, and the PDC build have already revealed dozens of surprise changes like an improved Internet Explorer with for example anti-popup support, a new plugin architecture, and a new download manager, etc.
Since Windows has a lot of software integrated, it's hard to keep track of all changes, especially if you're going to do it in detail, this early. Longhorn isn't even in Beta yet.
Compared to Java, 1 and 2 are not new. 3 is new, but I don't see the point of it...
:-) Or at least someone looks at implementation of language features as a race between Microsoft and Sun...
1 is only in the spec stage here, whereas for Java...
2 already exists for a long time in Java...
I wonder if someone is a Java developer or have a Java bias here.
There are some different opinions about Plug & Play, but with monitors, I think it was always a good idea. Letting monitors present themselves to Linux or whatever, along with their supported resolutions and their respective refresh rates is a good idea. But of course, this was in '96. I doubt it can still happen with today's P&P monitors. If it does and the monitors present the proper standardized information, well, then X sucks. :-P
Maybe you should change monitor, just in case some program will screw up then. Basically all current monitors won't display an image using an unsupported refresh rate, since the monitors of today need to know which refresh rates they support, to support Plug & Play.
I haven't heard about someone destroying a hard drive with that method and wouldn't be surprised if many quality hard drives of today have protective measures against that, just like those "computer parts" you mention.
Pet? Isn't that thing a girl won't do with a geek?
apparently not even reading from the CD. The article says doing a network install does the same thing...
:-)
LOL, that made me laugh
I feel not only sorry for those who had their drives destroyed, but also for the competence of the LG engineers.
Hmm.. LG is a el cheapo brand in many cases, so I'm not really surprised by these news. :-P
A drive shouldn't be physically destroyed by a logical error on a CD. Ever... Regardless what.
What are you talking about? Do you have any particular problem you wish to see a solution for, or are you just feeling like complaining about Microsoft?
Access 2003 uses the Access 2000 file format by default, just like Access XP.
Office 2003, Office XP, Office 2000, and Office 97 (with the exception of Access) can share files, usually seamlessly.
A user report regarding this:
"I ran the 2003 beta in an office that also uses Office 97 and Office XP, and
only encountered one problem with Excel that was corrected in a subsequent
beta update (I'm still running the beta). I encountered no other
compatibility issues. File formats remain the same, with the exception of
Visio and Outlook which have slight changes to their data formats. However,
both are 100% backward compatible and can be set up to run in 2002 (XP) file
compatibility mode."
----
Another one:
"You don't NEED any patches. The file format is basically the same, and
XP will happily open 97 files. There are plenty of legitimate reasons
for bagging Microsoft, but this ain't one of them. I switch files
between 97 and XP (and back) on a regular basis. This means that your
problem lies somewhere else. Exactly how did you move the files from
the new computer?What's the EXACT error message that you're getting
when you try to open the files, and HOW are you trying to open them;
through File -> Open, or through Windows Explorer? Also, you DID
install the versions of Office on the new computer in the correct
order didn't you? (You stated that you have both on the new computer;
you need to do 97, then 2000 (if applicable), then XP; NOT XP first,
then 97.)"
Yup, easily enough to assign each PAGE on the web its own IP address, by comparing that number to Google's index. :-)
You don't have to type a single dot, since they use colons. Bah!! :-)
:-P
Hmm... Colons... I fear a bad goatse joke coming up.
It's not like 2^128 addresses will be usable by anyone, since the total address space is divided into classes for various purposes. IIRC, the prefix part of an IPv6 address determines its class.
Yes, you can use hexadecimal numbers, and I think I'd recommend it too. :-)
::ffff:1.2.3.4. ::1 in shorthand form. ::0.
There are some "address concatenation" features/rules to make IPv6 addresses shorter.
- You can skip leading zeroes.
- One sequence of 16 bit blocks of zeroes can be replaced by a double colon -- "::", but not more than once.
Some examples:
- An IPv4-mapped IPv6 address:
- IPv6 address 3ffe:ffff:100:f101:0:0:0:1 becomes 3ffe:ffff:100:f101::1 in short form.
- 127.0.0.1 in IPv4 (localhost), i.e. 0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0001 in IPv6, becomes
- 0.0.0.0 in IPv4 (anyhost), i.e. 0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000 in IPv6, becomes