That isn't what I would call good traction for Microsoft's overwhelmingly dominant office suite
... you really need to keep in mind that Office 2007 users are more than likely to save their docs as the traditional.doc formats to remain backwards compatible with Office 2003 and earlier! It would be crazy to start using the ODF format for pretty much any reason in the same year as the product has been released, and require all users of earlier suites to install the Office 2007 compatibility add-on!
So rather look in the way of sales figures if you want to see if Office 2007 was a success or not, not the use of its own format.
People hate Ubuntu too. People hate AmigaOS. People hate FreeBSD. What's your point? People hate a lot, depending on what people you talk of. People love Windows XP too -- look at Neowin for among the most crowded forum communities on the web, and people do love Ubuntu, and some people even love AmigaOS and FreeBSD.
I doubt they'll care much. They'll sell a lot of XP licenses for the new systems in the event, so there's no big revenue problem. They'll solve the problem with getting people to upgrade later when Vista has matured and XP has expired in their product lifecycle.
What is making XP "popular" is that it doesn't have the problems Vista does. It is no advantage to XP.
Depends on how you look at it. Firefox is regarded as having advantages over IE in part because it lacks some of IE's security problems. XP do have real advantages over Vista in my eyes. Less problems is not to be scoffed at and called "lack of problems" -- it is a real advantage when you consider an OS.
The logical reasoning of the software they are using just not having a Vista version makes too much d@mn sense and doesn't bash MS.
It's quite funny if some are actually intending to "bash" Microsoft by a news item saying Microsoft will sell a lot of Windows XP licenses.:-p Sure, MS would have preferred to sell Vista, but I don't think they're crying over at Redmond.
Vista could be awesome, and any serious organization would still not have picked it, so this doesn't say much. It's simply too new and unproven. Now that it has performance issues (where some seem scheduled for improvement in SP1), that doesn't exactly paint a brighter picture either. So this is a bit of a non-news item to me, mostly aimed for narcissistic open source users perhaps?;-)
What Google needs is not to change its clean search engine, but just provide a new service, maybe text linked to from the search engine place... Called something like "Google Center" which is more of a portal, or at least news page. I know their blogs announcing stuff like Google Earth updates or whatever, but I don't think a blog is efficient enough in format. The page could collate news from different major areas (search, Google Earth, Gmail,...) along with having a "Misc" section where you have links to stories announcing other more minor things.
Just some one stop place where people can actually get an overview of not just their services, but the news on their services.
Unfortunately for Wikipedia, the quality or lack of it in competing encyclopedias does not resolve the problems in Wikipedia. I hope Wikipedia can work on these issues because I am seeing some of it too. I'm also seeing article rot being quite common, in that old articles deteriorate, and not really from a lack of good will either. Someone discuss the problem in a blog here: http://nonbovine-ruminations.blogspot.com/2007/02/ where-are-stable-versions.html
First, I don't think this tool was useless -- it was a quick way of achieving his goal of off-line Wikipedia browsing. Second, when I program I prefer to make something useful to me, and I don't think it has to do with a lack of passion for programming. It's just that I'd rather see my time come to good use, even if I enjoy the process by itself.
You have a point there... That combined with the low share cost may make most sense to me. Not that they'd win, but that they just maybe would pull of some PR stunt that bumped the stock a little so they could sell.
This is a minor patch for Service Pack 2 to make it accept more key ranges that their validation servers probably do by now. I'm not really sure what's suspicious, notable, or strange about this article.
The key validation runs on Microsoft's servers. This is probably to make the client side OS accept more key ranges. So patching in "more" keys would be hard to do since those wouldn't be accepted by the WGA anyway. Then it's much easier to crack the OS to not care for valid keys on the client side.
Forgot one thing. Although the topic is on C++/CLI (formerly called "Managed C++"), I'm not being stupid and confusing it with native C++, but the MS rep is actually saying a few things on their futre "native vs managed" strategy. In essence, they've listened and hear the demand. Not much to come for Orcas, but more in store for the version after.
This discussion came up again with Visual Studio 2008 "Orcas" and plans seemingly a bit lacking once again for an improved C++ feature set and general love for IntelliSense, etc.
Yes, as usual. See also BitTorrented FLAC's vs iTunes. It's the media industry that pulls the strings, neither Apple, nor Microsoft. Vista is merely repsecting the Image Constraint Token of the specs. Don't set it, nothing will be downsampled, even when using the proper Blu-ray / HDDVD formats.
Agreed. Vista is not blocking HD signals or anything, they're merely respecting the specs. They'd be in trouble if they didn't respect the ICT flag and played full quality despite that. And if the flag is not set by the media manufacturer, then Vista won't care for downsampling. Erog; it is up to the media industry on what they decide they want downsampled, not Vista.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, I of course meant OOXML above but you probably realized that.
So rather look in the way of sales figures if you want to see if Office 2007 was a success or not, not the use of its own format.
The "think of the children" mentality?
I for one welcome our new overclocked ultrafast quantum computer overlords.
The speed at which these may decode jpg images of my hot digital girlfriends! Mmmm...
"Ubuntu had to shutdown 5 of 8 production servers that are sponsored by Canonical, when they started attacking other systems."
In Soviet Russia, server attack you?
People hate Ubuntu too. People hate AmigaOS. People hate FreeBSD. What's your point? People hate a lot, depending on what people you talk of. People love Windows XP too -- look at Neowin for among the most crowded forum communities on the web, and people do love Ubuntu, and some people even love AmigaOS and FreeBSD.
There's more to Vista than the UI. Actually, most of Vista is not about the UI. But still, yes, there is better reliability on XP so far for many.
I doubt they'll care much. They'll sell a lot of XP licenses for the new systems in the event, so there's no big revenue problem. They'll solve the problem with getting people to upgrade later when Vista has matured and XP has expired in their product lifecycle.
What is making XP "popular" is that it doesn't have the problems Vista does. It is no advantage to XP.
Depends on how you look at it. Firefox is regarded as having advantages over IE in part because it lacks some of IE's security problems. XP do have real advantages over Vista in my eyes. Less problems is not to be scoffed at and called "lack of problems" -- it is a real advantage when you consider an OS.
The logical reasoning of the software they are using just not having a Vista version makes too much d@mn sense and doesn't bash MS.
:-p Sure, MS would have preferred to sell Vista, but I don't think they're crying over at Redmond.
It's quite funny if some are actually intending to "bash" Microsoft by a news item saying Microsoft will sell a lot of Windows XP licenses.
Vista could be awesome, and any serious organization would still not have picked it, so this doesn't say much. It's simply too new and unproven. Now that it has performance issues (where some seem scheduled for improvement in SP1), that doesn't exactly paint a brighter picture either. So this is a bit of a non-news item to me, mostly aimed for narcissistic open source users perhaps? ;-)
What Google needs is not to change its clean search engine, but just provide a new service, maybe text linked to from the search engine place... Called something like "Google Center" which is more of a portal, or at least news page. I know their blogs announcing stuff like Google Earth updates or whatever, but I don't think a blog is efficient enough in format. The page could collate news from different major areas (search, Google Earth, Gmail, ...) along with having a "Misc" section where you have links to stories announcing other more minor things.
Just some one stop place where people can actually get an overview of not just their services, but the news on their services.
Yes, and the idea had a renaissance in the 90's...
hmmm.. no, wait a minute!
Yes, holy goto madness! I don't even understand the goto statements here:
, 5200,
GOTO (5014,5000,2026,2010)KQ
PAUSE 'NO NO'
2026 JVERB=K
JSPK=JSPKT(JVERB)
IF(JTWO.NE.0)GOTO 2028
IF(JOBJ.EQ.0)GOTO 2036
2027 GOTO(9000,5066,3000,5031,2009,5031,9404,9406,5081
1 5200,5300,5506,5502,5504,5505)JVERB
Unfortunately for Wikipedia, the quality or lack of it in competing encyclopedias does not resolve the problems in Wikipedia. I hope Wikipedia can work on these issues because I am seeing some of it too. I'm also seeing article rot being quite common, in that old articles deteriorate, and not really from a lack of good will either. Someone discuss the problem in a blog here: http://nonbovine-ruminations.blogspot.com/2007/02/ where-are-stable-versions.html
First, I don't think this tool was useless -- it was a quick way of achieving his goal of off-line Wikipedia browsing. Second, when I program I prefer to make something useful to me, and I don't think it has to do with a lack of passion for programming. It's just that I'd rather see my time come to good use, even if I enjoy the process by itself.
You have a point there... That combined with the low share cost may make most sense to me. Not that they'd win, but that they just maybe would pull of some PR stunt that bumped the stock a little so they could sell.
The most surprising thing here to me is that this implies some share holders actually believed SCO had a case here.
Why is this labeled a service patch?
This is a minor patch for Service Pack 2 to make it accept more key ranges that their validation servers probably do by now. I'm not really sure what's suspicious, notable, or strange about this article.
The key validation runs on Microsoft's servers. This is probably to make the client side OS accept more key ranges. So patching in "more" keys would be hard to do since those wouldn't be accepted by the WGA anyway. Then it's much easier to crack the OS to not care for valid keys on the client side.
Forgot one thing. Although the topic is on C++/CLI (formerly called "Managed C++"), I'm not being stupid and confusing it with native C++, but the MS rep is actually saying a few things on their futre "native vs managed" strategy. In essence, they've listened and hear the demand. Not much to come for Orcas, but more in store for the version after.
This discussion came up again with Visual Studio 2008 "Orcas" and plans seemingly a bit lacking once again for an improved C++ feature set and general love for IntelliSense, etc.
s tID=970938&SiteID=1
Microsoft had the following to say:
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?Po
See bdunlap's response.
Tera is the SI unit for 10^12 so unless you want to introduce special cases for the computer industry alone, we need a new prefix.
Yes, as usual. See also BitTorrented FLAC's vs iTunes. It's the media industry that pulls the strings, neither Apple, nor Microsoft. Vista is merely repsecting the Image Constraint Token of the specs. Don't set it, nothing will be downsampled, even when using the proper Blu-ray / HDDVD formats.
Agreed. Vista is not blocking HD signals or anything, they're merely respecting the specs. They'd be in trouble if they didn't respect the ICT flag and played full quality despite that. And if the flag is not set by the media manufacturer, then Vista won't care for downsampling. Erog; it is up to the media industry on what they decide they want downsampled, not Vista.