"Microsoft Operating systems DO NOT ALLOW direct access to low level hardware."
Bull. So how does Asus EZFlash work? How about Matrox ProgBios for windows. Both allow BIOS flashing from within windows, no floppy required. I believe the IBM ThinkPad also has BIOS updates for windows.
I've upgraded or replaced my computer FOUR TIMES since I bought my printer. It's a Canon Bubble Jet 4100C, and it's still functioning like the day I bought it, which was 7 years ago. It is, of course, parallel only.
Then don't you think you should be badgering HP to fix their driver? How is this XP's fault? Drivers get direct access to the system, and if poorly written, can bring down the box. It's the same with linux.
This is the primary reason why I haven't purchased one of these yet. I have yet to see a review mention this in more detail than just listing it in the specs.
The point of the fancy steel case is to make it look good sitting in your living room along with the rest of your stereo equipment right? If you have to have a cable permanently jutting out of the front of the box and wrapping around into the back of the receiver, it kind of destroys the whole image.
Front inputs are supposed to be for things that aren't plugged in 24/7, but for things that you plug in to use, then unplug when you're done (ie. game controllers, digital cameras or DV camcorders, etc.) Grrr.
This isn't nearly as bad as the poster is trying to make it look. Microsoft is not by default in the list of "Trusted Publishers". The default configuration is that no one is trusted, and a dialog box pops up to warn that something is being installed.
These kinds of dialogs pop up all the time when surfing questionable sites (warez, cracks, pr0n, etc.) and most users know to click No on these. Just because it says "Signed by Microsoft" on the pop up at the cracks site, are you going to go ahead and click Yes? I sure wouldn't...
The biggest problem I can think of that hasn't been explained is this:
According to what I've read, in order to get moving, you lean forward, the thing starts to tip forward, then the wheels start rolling to keep you vertical. If that's the case, what happens if you've reached the maximum speed, and you lean forward some more? If it's got no more room to accelerate, how does it keep you vertical? I wouldn't want to be the person who tries this and ends up skidding for 20 or 30 feet on my face.
Who said that was some kind of record? I didn't. I said that was it's currnet uptime, and the last reboot was for a patch. These servers (domain controllers plus DNS) routinely do several months at a time, with ZERO unscheduled downtime so far.
Yes, it's an active directory domain controller that holds approx. 60,000 objects, and does upwards of 400 authentications per second several times per day. It also serves as a DNS server and global catalog. Is that enough for you?
"I wouldn't know, though. I changed my systems over to Red Hat, and keep up with the errata, and amuse myself by opening a sessions and typing in "uptime" "
C:\>uptime \\CURLY has been up for: 47 day(s), 4 hour(s), 37 minute(s), 46 second(s)
Estimate based on last boot record in the event log. See UPTIME/help for more detail.
C:\>ver
Microsoft Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]
C:\>
Last reboot was for some patch or other. I've never had any unscheduled downtime on this box. Put that in your pipe and smoke it:-)
"Realistically, you could deploy winxp pro anywhere you deployed win2k server."
No, realistically, you couldn't. WinXP Pro has a very limited version of teminal services (only one user at a time, including console users, while W2K Server supports a console user plus two admins, or many users). It also can't be a domain controller, DNS server, DHCP server, SQL Server, or any other kind of server for that matter. XP only supports up to 10 simultaneous network connections, so it can't even be a useful file/print server.
You are correct..NET Server is currently at RC1, with RC2 coming out "any time now". It's currently expected in Q2 2003..NET Server is the server version of Windows XP (NT 5.1, where W2K is NT 5.0).
Longhorn for the desktop (NT 5.2?) is in early alpha right now, due out I think sometime in 2004. They just scrapped the Server version of Longhorn.
Blackcomb (most likely NT 6.0) is the first version that will have the native SQL filesystem. It's due in client and server versions sometime around 2006-2007ish.
Take all the dates with a grain of salt, because none are set in stone yet.
Since the article is badly/.ed, I'm not sure what feature of XDocs is supposed to be the PDF-killer. According to the MS website, XDocs"streamlines the process of gathering information by enabling teams and organizations to easily create and work with rich, dynamic forms."
Does PDF do forms? I thought it was just a format for proper distribution and printing of electornic documents, and I don't see how XDocs is at all related to that. If anyone has been able to get at the article, please enlighten me.
Only florescent lighting would cause any problem. Incandescant lights don't flicker. However, as other's have pointed out, you can still see flicker when there's no lights on in a room, so lighting really has very little to do with it.
The only thing I could find in the EULA even remotely like this is this section:
"2.4 Internet Gaming/Update Features. If you choose to utilize the Internet gaming or update features within the Software, it is necessary to use certain computer system, hardware, and software information to implement the features. By using these features, you explicitly authorize Microsoft or its designated agent to access and utilize the necessary information for Internet gaming and/or updating purposes. Microsoft may use this information solely to improve our software or to provide customized services or technologies to you. Microsoft may disclose this information to others, but not in a form that personally identifies you."
How is that language too broad? Or are you referring to another section of the EULA that I missed? Please, enlighten me...
Note: this is from the XP SP1 EULA, which I've heard is pretty similar to the W2K SP3 EULA.
That doesn't necessarily imply cheating. When I used to cruch for team Matroxusers, I had a handful of quad-xeon boxes running, and routinely got 100-150 WU/day. If I had put Seti on all the boxes I have access too, I could easily ramp up to >500/day.
Maybe that guy just has intermittent access to a server farm or something...
Good point. This isn't about EULA's at all. This would be a very legally binding contract that was signed by the executives of both companies. There are usually no gray areas left behind in one of these licenses.
However, according to the article, the agency MS hired for this "promotion" claims to have permits for everything they did. It's not clear who issued the permits though...
Slashdot Mirror
"Microsoft Operating systems DO NOT ALLOW direct access to low level hardware."
Bull. So how does Asus EZFlash work? How about Matrox ProgBios for windows. Both allow BIOS flashing from within windows, no floppy required. I believe the IBM ThinkPad also has BIOS updates for windows.
I've upgraded or replaced my computer FOUR TIMES since I bought my printer. It's a Canon Bubble Jet 4100C, and it's still functioning like the day I bought it, which was 7 years ago. It is, of course, parallel only.
Then don't you think you should be badgering HP to fix their driver? How is this XP's fault? Drivers get direct access to the system, and if poorly written, can bring down the box. It's the same with linux.
This is the primary reason why I haven't purchased one of these yet. I have yet to see a review mention this in more detail than just listing it in the specs.
The point of the fancy steel case is to make it look good sitting in your living room along with the rest of your stereo equipment right? If you have to have a cable permanently jutting out of the front of the box and wrapping around into the back of the receiver, it kind of destroys the whole image.
Front inputs are supposed to be for things that aren't plugged in 24/7, but for things that you plug in to use, then unplug when you're done (ie. game controllers, digital cameras or DV camcorders, etc.) Grrr.
These two items are unrelated. The first, he just sets the "return receipt" flag. It's a standard feature of most email programs.
The second sounds like the Netbios Messenger thing, that was covered on slashdot a while back.
Neither involve the use of a trojan. They're both pure evil, but it's not as bad as you make it sound.
Actually, AMG doesn't build faster processors, they build faster Mercedes Benzes. AMD builds faster processors.
This isn't nearly as bad as the poster is trying to make it look. Microsoft is not by default in the list of "Trusted Publishers". The default configuration is that no one is trusted, and a dialog box pops up to warn that something is being installed.
These kinds of dialogs pop up all the time when surfing questionable sites (warez, cracks, pr0n, etc.) and most users know to click No on these. Just because it says "Signed by Microsoft" on the pop up at the cracks site, are you going to go ahead and click Yes? I sure wouldn't...
The biggest problem I can think of that hasn't been explained is this:
According to what I've read, in order to get moving, you lean forward, the thing starts to tip forward, then the wheels start rolling to keep you vertical. If that's the case, what happens if you've reached the maximum speed, and you lean forward some more? If it's got no more room to accelerate, how does it keep you vertical? I wouldn't want to be the person who tries this and ends up skidding for 20 or 30 feet on my face.
The tactile feedback we want is not to tell us when a button has been pressed, it's to let us FIND the button without looking at the remote.
Who said that was some kind of record? I didn't. I said that was it's currnet uptime, and the last reboot was for a patch. These servers (domain controllers plus DNS) routinely do several months at a time, with ZERO unscheduled downtime so far.
Yes, it's an active directory domain controller that holds approx. 60,000 objects, and does upwards of 400 authentications per second several times per day. It also serves as a DNS server and global catalog. Is that enough for you?
"though Whistler and Blackcomb together are normally just called "Whistler" for the resort name"
Actually, they're called Whistler-Blackcomb.
Last reboot was for some patch or other. I've never had any unscheduled downtime on this box. Put that in your pipe and smoke it
"Realistically, you could deploy winxp pro anywhere you deployed win2k server."
No, realistically, you couldn't. WinXP Pro has a very limited version of teminal services (only one user at a time, including console users, while W2K Server supports a console user plus two admins, or many users). It also can't be a domain controller, DNS server, DHCP server, SQL Server, or any other kind of server for that matter. XP only supports up to 10 simultaneous network connections, so it can't even be a useful file/print server.
You are correct. .NET Server is currently at RC1, with RC2 coming out "any time now". It's currently expected in Q2 2003. .NET Server is the server version of Windows XP (NT 5.1, where W2K is NT 5.0).
Longhorn for the desktop (NT 5.2?) is in early alpha right now, due out I think sometime in 2004. They just scrapped the Server version of Longhorn.
Blackcomb (most likely NT 6.0) is the first version that will have the native SQL filesystem. It's due in client and server versions sometime around 2006-2007ish.
Take all the dates with a grain of salt, because none are set in stone yet.
I'm karma capped too, but most of my posts are at 1. Why? Ever seen the little checkbox labeled "No Score +1 Bonus". Some of us actually use that...
That message on their front page is sure quite a slap. For those that missed it, it says:
"Gateway Timeout
The following error occurred:
A gateway timeout occurred. The server is unreachable.
Please contact the administrator."
Damn, MS must be hurting after such a tongue lashing...
Since the article is badly /.ed, I'm not sure what feature of XDocs is supposed to be the PDF-killer. According to the MS website, XDocs "streamlines the process of gathering information by enabling teams and organizations to easily create and work with rich, dynamic forms."
Does PDF do forms? I thought it was just a format for proper distribution and printing of electornic documents, and I don't see how XDocs is at all related to that. If anyone has been able to get at the article, please enlighten me.
Only florescent lighting would cause any problem. Incandescant lights don't flicker. However, as other's have pointed out, you can still see flicker when there's no lights on in a room, so lighting really has very little to do with it.
The only thing I could find in the EULA even remotely like this is this section:
"2.4 Internet Gaming/Update Features. If you choose to utilize the Internet gaming or update features within the Software, it is necessary to use certain computer system, hardware, and software information to implement the features. By using these features, you explicitly authorize Microsoft or its designated agent to access and utilize the necessary information for Internet gaming and/or updating purposes. Microsoft may use this information solely to improve our software or to provide customized services or technologies to you. Microsoft may disclose this information to others, but not in a form that personally identifies you."
How is that language too broad? Or are you referring to another section of the EULA that I missed? Please, enlighten me...
Note: this is from the XP SP1 EULA, which I've heard is pretty similar to the W2K SP3 EULA.
That doesn't necessarily imply cheating. When I used to cruch for team Matroxusers, I had a handful of quad-xeon boxes running, and routinely got 100-150 WU/day. If I had put Seti on all the boxes I have access too, I could easily ramp up to >500/day.
Maybe that guy just has intermittent access to a server farm or something...
This is definintely not a EULA. It's an enterprise license agreement, that would've been signed by executives of both companies (Kmart and MS).
Good point. This isn't about EULA's at all. This would be a very legally binding contract that was signed by the executives of both companies. There are usually no gray areas left behind in one of these licenses.
""There are permits for everything," said Colleen Lacter of Waggener Edstrom, a public relations firm representing Microsoft"
Did you read the article? hmm??
It's not totally clear if the permits were valid, but if this is true, then they were totally legal.
However, according to the article, the agency MS hired for this "promotion" claims to have permits for everything they did. It's not clear who issued the permits though...