If what I have seen in the "file list" from the leaked MS code still holds true, all the HTML rendering, CSS, PNG and etc stuff is in DLLs that are totally seperate from the OS and could easily be updated independantly.
When Microsoft says "we cant fix xyz", it usually means "we cant fix xyz because it would cost us more (in money, programmer time etc) than we are going to gain (in sales, PR etc)"
Firstly, we need to see the FCC step in and tell CBS that they cant place any restrictions on the rebroadcast of CBS content
Packaging wouldnt be so bad if the channels that were packaged were related.
For example, buy the "Disney" package and get all the disney channels in the one package. Buy the "HBO" package and get all the HBO channels in one package. Buy "ESPN" and get all the ESPN channels in one package. Buy "Fox Sports" and get all the fox sports channels in one package. etc.
I have no problem with being forced to take MTV2 with MTV1 (or whatever), its that if you want any nickelodian channels, you have to take MTV and other crap as well.
1.Get good spec PC. (not big-box OEM full of big-box OEM crap but something with no bundled software) 2.Install Windows XP on it. 3.Set up all the service packs, security patches and everything else. 4.Make Windows Update automaticly download all the latest service packs for everything. 5.Get rid of/hide Internet Explorer and Outlook Express. 6.Install a good virus checker like Norton and set it up to auto-update. This should stop most viruses, even if the parents are cluless enough to go out of the way to run a virus/worm/etc exe file, the virus checker will catch it and refuse to allow you to run it. Plus, the virus checker "you have a virus" window should be enough to warn even the most cluless newbies that this program is bad. 7.Install Firefox, Thunderbird & OpenOffice and configure them all in their most secure modes (i.e. turn on popup blocking etc). Also, configure Mozilla Junk Mail filters. 8.If they want a media player, install something thats good, wont screw up their system (i.e. NOT RealPlayer/Windows Media/etc) and that can play the media files they want to play. 9.Install good programs to catch Spyware as well as programs to catch system problems (something like Norton SystemWorks does a good job there) and 10.Educate them
IMO, the 5 biggest problems non-experts face when it comes to the Internet are: 1.Giving out personal details online when they shouldnt/Identify Theft (e.g. its ok to give your Credit Card number to amazon.com but its not ok to give it to hackerz.ru) 2.Viruses, Worms and Trojan Horses & Spyware (i.e. its NOT ok to run strange files that you dont recognize and dont know. And clicking yes on that "Do you want to install this ActiveX Cotnrol from SpywareCorp.Com" dialog is definatly NOT a good idea) 3.Scams and Fraud (That person who claims to be from nigeria and claims to have lots of money doesnt actually have any money and is trying to scam you. Also, that email claiming to be from your bank is NOT from your bank and is trying to scam you out of your username and password so they can steal all your money. And buying this "Hot Stock" WONT make you rich, it will only make the person telling you to buy it rich.) 4.Spam (No, buying this pill from this internet pharmacy located god-knows-where WONT make your penis any larger. And anyhow, having a larger penis doesnt make one shred of difference. Also, playing this online casino WONT make you rich.) 5.Security of private information, emails, chat etc. (Regular email can be read by anyone, start using Encryption to make your mail hard to read.)
If we can educate Internet newbies about these 5 things, the Internet as a whole will be a better place:)
Remember that Windows Media Player is (currently) 2 things, the CODECS (i.e. DirectShow) that programs like Premier and such use (this is what e.g. linux media players using windows binary dlls for some WMP formats use) and the interface (the ugly thing that you actually use to play media)
To me, the ideal solution for media players is this: 1.MS opens up the complete specs for codecs under an "anyone can use this info" licence. This would allow anyone to write a codec and allow anyone to write a front-end that uses whatever DirectShow codecs are installed. And 2.The UI component of WMP is either removed or at minumum made an optional install.
The problem I have with the "install other players" argument is, which players? Shipping bloat-ware-laiden Real doesnt benifit anyone except Real. Shipping QuickTime is good but it only benifits Apple.
I think another possible remedy is to force MS to publish all the specs for their WMP file formats under an "anyone can use this" licence. That way, even if Windows Media does become the domanent file format, it doesnt extend the MS monopoly since Linux, OSX and whatever else can play them.
Why dont content providers switch?
on
Real's Reality
·
· Score: 1
Especially those serving paid content.
One common argument is "real is the standard", "real is dominant", "real has the largest installed base" etc. But, with WMP getting more installed base on windows, if that is the main argument, why not use Windows Media instead? Or Quicktime? (not as much installed base as Real or Windows Media but the player comes with OSX and is free to install on windows plus I think the streaming server and mabie the encoder is free too)
Therefore, contact your representatives and senators (particularly those senators who hold the ballance of power and are able to influence the passage or blocking of this) and let them know that the FTA is bad (not just for the IP laws but for the way it does absoultly nothing worthwile for our farmers and generally gives far more to America (and especially large american companies) than it does to Australia)
Unlike America where the passage of the FTA is a done deal (as long as the unmarked bundles of bills in the unmarked black briefcases get into the hands of the polititions that they are supposed to be bribes to anyway), its by no means certain that the FTA will pass in australia.
One thing to remember is that, unlike many bills that have passed through the senate after the government did deals with the minor parties and aggreed to some amendments, the FTA cant be ammended and has to be passed as-is.
Firstly, all ISPs (and corperations, schools, unis and so on) should block port 25 by default. Those that want to run a mailserver for legitimate reasons can do so but anyone who hasnt speicificly said "I want to run a SMTP server on my connection" will be prevented from doing so (this would cut out 99% of the spam comming from spam zombie boxes)
Second, close open relays (if you need to have an "open machine" run some kind of SMTP authentication)
Thirdly, implement SPF for more hosts and more clients (if you want to run your own mail server with xxx@mydomain.com addresses but relay through mailservers at ISP, work etc, just add those SMTP servers to the SPF record)
And forthly, be more proactive in blacklisting ISPs that are known spam havens (if enough people block the IP ranges of bulletproofspamhosting.com, spammers wont be able to get their messages through and bulletproofspamhosting.com will go out of business when the spammers leave) If its a regular ISP with non-spam customers as well, pressure from the non-spam customers (especially if those non-spam customers are big) might convince the ISP to dump the spamers. Eventually, if this happens enough, ISPs will realize that hosting spamers means that they will be blacklisted.
Here in Australia, we have decent broadband service and a fair deal of choice.
Telstra (phone company, was government owned, now partially privatized) owns all the phone network and offers phone and DSL service over it. They are regulated by the government (which unlike in America, otherwise known as the United States of Big Corporations, actually has some teeth) Also, other companies (and there are a fair number) offer DSL over the telstra wires.
And, guess what... Telstra is NOT the best provider in terms of service.
We recently signed up with TPG Internet and we are getting 512k down 128k up for AU$80 a month (not sure how that converts to $US). We also have totally unlimited bandwidth with no caps.
The point is that Microsoft has been declared (in a US court no less) a monopoly company. Microsoft is using Windows to extend its monopoly in areas like Internet Search (MSN search), Instant Messaging (MSN messenger), Web Browsers (Internet Explorer), Email programs (Outlook Express), Media Players (Windows Media) etc.
Firstly, by removing (or at least making optional) those parts of windows that can be, it enables OEMs, knowledgable users (e.g. when setting up windows for family) and so on to swap them out. For example, you could have different messenger or media player or whatever.
On the other hand, forcing MS to remove IE wont make difference since its not possible to run windows without all the IE dlls and stuff (the dlls I listed above). Therefore, since we cant remove IE & its rendering engine, the solution to help people to compete is to: 1.Allow anyone to use 100% of the functionality in the IE dlls (same as how MS can do that) 2.Allow for replacement User Interfaces that replace the IE user interface with something else that uses the same MS core HTML rendering engine 3.Allow someone to make a new HTML rendering engine that can replace the MS one (especially so for WINE/ReactOS/etc) etc
Since microsoft has a monopoly with its windows product, it can (in a fair number of areas) control file formats and network protocols. By forcing them to open up things like HTML help, Windows Media formats and other "Microsoft" formats as well as network protocols like Microsoft Server Authentication, Microsoft Windows Networking (i.e. the My Network Places stuff), it means that Microsoft wont be able to use their monopoly on windows to force people who want to talk those file formats or protocols to use windows. MS is basicly saying the folowing: "If you want windows, you have to take all this other stuff as well" which therefore means less people will be using non-ms alternatives to the "other stuff" MS is including. Also, by keeping interfaces/document formats/network protocols private, it becomes harder to use that non-MS "other stuff".
e.g.Microsoft is using its Windows monopoly to pre-install Windows Media Player. From there, it is then using that to push its Windows Media Audio and Windows Media Video formats. Currently, if you want to play the latest version of those files on an X86 machine, you need to use WMP. By forcing MS to open the format of Windows Media Audio and Windows Media Video, they are not allowed to use their Windows monopoly to create a Monopoly on media players (since any player would be able to handle WMP formats)
1.Remove any references to MSN (so they cant push their MSN internet service or e.g. MSN search 2.Make MSN messenger something that you can choose to install or choose not to install (i.e. if you dont want it, you can choose not to install it and install another messenger or no messenger at all) 3.Completly open up the Windows Media Player codec layer such that anyone can write WMP codecs and anyone can use those codecs in their app (making it so that e.g. games can use the codecs for displaying full-screen video clips or playing game audio would be a nice thing also, I dont know if its already possible or not) 4.Detatch the Windows Media Player UI from windows and from the codecs and make it an optional install. 5.Force microsoft to have one OEM price and one OEM contract. Anyone that wants windows OEM can buy at the same price (as long as they are bundling with a PC, they qualify for OEM price). 6.MS not able to dictate what OEMs can/cant do. For example, let OEMs install whatever they want alongside windows (i.e. Linux, Mozilla or whatever else) 7.Publish all the communications protocols used by anything that comes on the windows CD under a clear "anyone can use this with no restrictions" licence. Also, publish all of their various data storage formats under the same sort of licence (e.g. NTFS filesystem specs, MS office document formats, MS media files, regular and HTML help document files,.NET binaries etc etc). Ditto for all their "secret" APIs (such as apis in MSHTML.DLL, SHELL32.DLL, SHLWAPI.DLL, SHDOCVW.DLL, SHFOLDER.DLL, WININET.DLL, COMCTL32.DLL, ADVAPI32.DLL, JSCRIPT.DLL, VBSCRIPT.DLL,.NET runtime,.NET libraries, DirectX, Media Player libs and whatever else) That way, anyone can talk to/use their HTML renderer, internet DLLs and whatever else. Also, it would (presumably) allow one to write a new HTML renderer (e.g. based on gecko) that could replace the MS one. 8.Force MS to unbundle Outlook Express, publish all the data formats that OE uses to store stuff, etc etc etc. (so that other mail programs can be used instead if you want to) 8.Force MS to completly implement the current W3C standards for HTML, XML and such. This includes complete support for ALL parts of formats like PNG 9.MS not allowed to use patents to protect their monopoly in the OS space (for example, cant use patents on.NET to attack mono) and 10.MS not allowed to use influence to try and spread products inside EU (e.g. applying pressure to governments/corps who are trying to decide between windows and linux)
These are all important but the most important IMO is point 7 (i.e. the "open all their secrets" thing) since that will level the playingfield as far as competitors go. For example, Mozilla will be able to talk MS server authentication on all platforms, with no licence conditions or strings attatched. And things like Linux and ReactOS will have full information to be able to read NTFS file systems. And so on.
(although I have never owned an IBM drive so that could be why:)
Only time I know of where I lost hard disk data was with a 40gb (I think it was 40gb, may have been a 20gb though) and that failure coincided with a blown motherboard & a fair amount of repair cost. Plus, there was what looked like a burn mark on one of the large surface-mount ICs on the hard disk circut board. So, in this case, I can say that it probobly wasnt a manfacturing defect:)
If they just documented all the APIs in such dlls as shlwapi.dll, shell32.dll, comctl32.dll, uxtheme.dll, mshtml.dll, shdocvw.dll, user23.dll, comdlg32.dll, kernel32.dll, ntdll.dll, ddraw.dll and so on, then all these problems with "MS has secret APIs" will go away.
It does mean that MS wont be able to remove those APIs later but I have seen windows versions from NT4 through to XP and MS didnt remove any APIs in those versions. (in the core dlls anyway)
Plus, completly documenting these APIs would help projects like ReactOS and WINE:)
As for the usage of the "undocumented" apis, they are used for 3 things: 1.bits of windows to talk to each other 2.internally to the shell (i.e. things used by explorer.exe to talk to dlls like shlwapi.dll and shell32.dll and such) and 3.used by MS middleware to talk to windows (for example, iexplore.exe is just a wrapper of sorts around a function called IEWinMain in shdocvw.dll)
Note that shdocvw.dll, mshtml.dll and other such dlls are most definatly "windows" and not "middleware" (since a fair chunk of the functions in them ARE documented in the Platform SDK and on MSDN but not all of the functions)
Regarding product placement in games, some things that I believe should be done: 1.Advertising should only appear in places it normally appears. For example, if you are moving through a subway or train station, put billboards in the places one normally finds them. Or put billboards alongside the road in a driving game like Cruisn USA. Or like how the Need For Speed games feature real cars like porsche, ferrari etc.
2.If you are simulating a real-world present-day situation (such as a sports stadium & sports teams or racetrack & race teams), use the same ads as the real world situation. One example of this being done wrong is the EA game V8 Challenge. In this game, there is a simulation of the Mount Panorama racetrack at Bathurst (in australia). One part of this racetrack has a bridge of some kind that crosses over the track. On the real racetrack there is (and was when V8 Challenge was created) an advertisment for Dunlop tyres on this bridge. But in V8 Challenge, the buffoons at EA put Bridgestone logos on the bridge instead and ruined things.
Same with sports teams and etc. For example, just like how Ferrari is sponsered by various companies (tic-tac, shell, vodafone etc) in real life, the Ferraris in should have the correct sponsors logos in the right place. (although in a few cases there can be issues e.g. where cigarette ads are still legal for some motorsports but where they arent legal in the games)
3.Dont have player interation with the products being advertised. For example, a game where you have to buy food from a KFC or whatever to move through the game is bad. In cases where real-world items are used for gameplay, dont just have one brand (e.g. if you are going to have real-world cars, have several makes) This only applies in games where there is a defined "player". (e.g. a RPG or a game like "the sims"). Having e.g. a KFC store or a Shell gas station pop up in a Sim City city for example would be fine since its not being directly used by the player.
4.Dont put ads in the wrong setting. For example, having an ad for Nike in a medieval themed game would be totally stupid since nike shoes never existed back then. "future earth" games not based on any particular universe can have product placement and get away with it as long as it looks like it would still be used in the future (in the future, people still enjoy a refreshing ice cold Coca-Cola or whatever it is)
and 5.Dont put the ads or products into the dialog or storyline. For example, dont have a character in a cutscene say "Lets go get a Coke" or whatever.
But doesnt this treaty have to be passed by both the US congress and the Australian parliment before this (and the other measures in it) actually become law?
We all know how most congressmen only care about money (the same money paid by big american corperations to Bush to get him to push for these nasty things in the first place) so I suspect getting the trade aggreement passed through congress would be trivial.
However, in australia, it has to pass through the Senate. Now is the time for all aussies to pressue the parliment NOT to pass this totally UNFAIR aggreement that basicly gives the US everything it wanted for nothing in return. Just like the senate has rejected or ammended several other contraveral/crappy pieces of Howard Government legislation (much to the annoyance of Howard), it can reject (being a treaty like this, they cant ammend it) the FTA. (at least I think so, I dont fully understand how this kind of thing works here in australia)
In any case, regardless of what happens, one way to protest (against this and other things including the general "bush says jump, howard says how high" moves that have been going on lately) is to not vote for howard or his party.
Why wont the farmers in america accept a "gradual reduction of protection over 15-20 years"? Reducing the protection gradually over that long a period would give them plenty of time to either get better (and still be able to survive in a lower-subsidy/lower-tarrif/lower-protection environment or if thats not possible, to get out of farming into something else.
1.Microsoft deliberatly dragging its heels on updates and the editor (probobly either to get more sales of Halo XBOX or mabie so that halo 2 comes out first)
2.Microsoft preventing Bungie from doing the ports to PC and MAC inhouse (probobly because MS wanted them to get working on the next XBOX thingo MS had lined up)
3.Rediculous hardware requirements for both ports (brought on because microsoft insisted that the ports contain all the graphics effect fluff and crap that the XBOX version has and then some)
4.Sucky multiplayer (because the netcode isnt optomized for transfer over a low-bandwidth link like dialup or low-bandwitdh broadband)
and 5.Lack of content because MS is deliberatly holding back the halo editor
I have learnt one thing about MS If there is a game that is ultimatly "owned" by Microsoft and it has both a version on XBOX and a version or versions on other platforms, avoid the other platform versions since MS will deliberatly make them sucky compared to the XBOX version so they can sell more XBOXes
1.the stuff Gearbox has been sending for QA is too buggy to release (and after learning from the flak MS got from the last buggy patches for the game, they are listening).
2.The people running halo QA at MS are incompetent
3.Not enough money or personell allocated to halo QA.
or (the conspiricy theory) 4.Microsoft doesnt want the editor and the "patches that make the game better" to appear since that will make Halo PC better than Halo XBOX and lead to more sales of Halo PC and less sales of Halo XBOX (and therefore potentially less XBOXes). I suspect that Microsoft is waiting for the (XBL enabled) Halo 2 to appear so that people wanting a good halo online experience are forced to get Halo 2 (plus an XBOX and an XBL subscription) and then, once its been out for a while, then release the patches.
Ultimatly, the only reason MS wanted Halo was because they wanted "a game that would sell XBOXes". Thats why they screwed gamers with the PC/MAC ports and thats why they continue to screw gamers with the patches and the editor.
BTW, I was able to play completly through the PC version of the game (forget which difficulty level though) with (as far as I can remember), no major crashes or lockups (this is on windows XP).
Backwards compatibility is key, look at how many PS2s were sold because they can run PS1 games also.
New specs: 1.Pentium 4 at something like 3GHz (by the time XBOX2 comes out, 3GHz chips will have come down in price)
2.at least 512 megs of RAM (its not like RAM is expensive)
3.hard disk at something like 20gb or 40gb or whatever
4.complete security (based on RSA or something better if its available by then) with the BIOS engineered inside some kind of unremovable, unflashable, unreplacable surface-mount chip (making it so that the BIOS cant be fiddled with without screwing the XBOX2 completly should be possible).
Most people here probobly despise DRM, copy protection and stuff (Even I dont like it much) but the fact is, the XBOX2 is going to have copy protection like this anyway (to stop all the hackers).
5.a drive that can play exisiting XBOX disks, DVDs, music CDs as well as special XBOX2 disks (using blu-ray or some other high-density standard to make them harder to copy). Add special features to the drive or the BIOS so that it will reject any disk with a signature indicating that its a recordable media (CD-R, DVD-R etc). This makes piracy even harder and also prevents running of pirate DVDs and music disks.
6.a good graphics chip (perhaps of GeForceFX level if the price has come down enough by then)
7.LAN card and drivers to allow broadband out of the box. Remove the need for an XBOX live kit to be purchased, instead, you purchase XBOX2 live subscription time. Basicly, in order to play XBL games or download content for XBL games via XBOX2 live, you would just get a subscription which would cost a certain amount per month. Exactly how you sign up and pay I dont know but it should be designed so that you can sign-up online via a PC and also online through a special XBOX interface (i.e. plug your XBOX into the broadband link, run the special signup option and sign up with a credit card). Options for those that dont want to trust online signups would also be available. (i.e. its gotta be as easy as possible to sign up)
The XBOX2 should not allow email, web or anything like that (for one thing, previous attempts at "use the internet from your TV" bombed horribly)
8.complete backwards compatibility with existing XBOX games (only the legal origonals of course).
9.to prevent hacks, the hard disk and memcards would be encrypted with a strong encryption mechanisim with the actual encryption being inside the BIOS (which if you remember is supposed to be unreadable making it difficult to just disassemble the BIOS and get the encryption)
and 10.make good games with good online playability (if the libraries are done right, adding online play should be simple with all the tricky bits handled by the network layers)
1.they should be forced to reveal on a public website with no cost or licence restrictions their "propriatory" file formats. (exactly which formats would have to be decided by a sutable panel made up of legal people and technical people but should include all the office file formats like word, excel, powerpoint, access). Also, all their "secret" APIs (for example hooks into the shell) and all their "secret" network protocols (for example, the various windows-only authentication for MS IIS and MS proxy server
2.they should be forced to make all their contracts with OEMs public and be banned from having secret contracts with OEMs.
3.they should be forced to sell OEM windows at one price and one price only to ALL OEMs.
4.they should be prohibited from restricting OEMs who ship (or want to ship, talk about shipping etc) systems with operating systems other than windows, systems with no operating system installed at all or systems containing windows in conjunction with one or more other opreating systems.
5.same as for 4. but for application software (i.e. OEM pre-installs mozilla or netscape or whatever else)
Basicly, force them open on the OEM desktop plus force them to give up the secrets that will allow their competitors (including Open Source) to talk to, interact with and share data with those products (windows, office, IE, IIS, MS servers, media player, MSN messenger and etc) that microsoft currently enjoys a monopoly on or that microsoft is currently using is monopoly power to push.
I am just pointing out that if its possible for movies, why not for games?
Are there people who are complaining that should be banned or restricted in ways other than by the self-regulated MPAA rating system (by which the MPAA assigns a rating to every movie and then most theaters seem to enforce that rating)?
The industry should get together with the retailers and the various groups involved in this (including the "violent computer games are bad, ban them" crowd) and come up with a form of self-regulation and self-policing that ensures that minors dont get violent games (or at least that makes it harder for minors to get violent games) and that keeps the "violent computer games are bad" crowd at bay.
There has to be a middle ground between what we have now and "government mandated laws" (which is what these idiots want)
Just aggree on a standard classification system like there is for movies (best solution would be to just use the existing ESRB ratings system) then make that system legally binding on publishers, developers, stores and gamers?
It means that if kids walk into EB or Wal-Mart or whatever and want to buy , they will need to show that they are old enough to play it.
Then, it gives those who think that is too violent a way to complain. All they need to do is to complain to the ESRB that the rating is wrong and if enough people complain, it can be re-evaluated.
Slashdot Mirror
Doing exactly that is what the ReactOS and WINE teams are doing/need to do (i.e. making a wrapper around some HTML engine that can replace these dlls)
Another reason to look into this sort of thing is to completly document all functions and interfaces into the IE dlls (something M$ doesnt do)
If what I have seen in the "file list" from the leaked MS code still holds true, all the HTML rendering, CSS, PNG and etc stuff is in DLLs that are totally seperate from the OS and could easily be updated independantly.
When Microsoft says "we cant fix xyz", it usually means "we cant fix xyz because it would cost us more (in money, programmer time etc) than we are going to gain (in sales, PR etc)"
Firstly, we need to see the FCC step in and tell CBS that they cant place any restrictions on the rebroadcast of CBS content
Packaging wouldnt be so bad if the channels that were packaged were related.
For example, buy the "Disney" package and get all the disney channels in the one package.
Buy the "HBO" package and get all the HBO channels in one package.
Buy "ESPN" and get all the ESPN channels in one package.
Buy "Fox Sports" and get all the fox sports channels in one package.
etc.
I have no problem with being forced to take MTV2 with MTV1 (or whatever), its that if you want any nickelodian channels, you have to take MTV and other crap as well.
1.Get good spec PC. (not big-box OEM full of big-box OEM crap but something with no bundled software)
:)
2.Install Windows XP on it.
3.Set up all the service packs, security patches and everything else.
4.Make Windows Update automaticly download all the latest service packs for everything.
5.Get rid of/hide Internet Explorer and Outlook Express.
6.Install a good virus checker like Norton and set it up to auto-update. This should stop most viruses, even if the parents are cluless enough to go out of the way to run a virus/worm/etc exe file, the virus checker will catch it and refuse to allow you to run it.
Plus, the virus checker "you have a virus" window should be enough to warn even the most cluless newbies that this program is bad.
7.Install Firefox, Thunderbird & OpenOffice and configure them all in their most secure modes (i.e. turn on popup blocking etc). Also, configure Mozilla Junk Mail filters.
8.If they want a media player, install something thats good, wont screw up their system (i.e. NOT RealPlayer/Windows Media/etc) and that can play the media files they want to play.
9.Install good programs to catch Spyware as well as programs to catch system problems (something like Norton SystemWorks does a good job there)
and 10.Educate them
IMO, the 5 biggest problems non-experts face when it comes to the Internet are:
1.Giving out personal details online when they shouldnt/Identify Theft (e.g. its ok to give your Credit Card number to amazon.com but its not ok to give it to hackerz.ru)
2.Viruses, Worms and Trojan Horses & Spyware (i.e. its NOT ok to run strange files that you dont recognize and dont know. And clicking yes on that "Do you want to install this ActiveX Cotnrol from SpywareCorp.Com" dialog is definatly NOT a good idea)
3.Scams and Fraud (That person who claims to be from nigeria and claims to have lots of money doesnt actually have any money and is trying to scam you. Also, that email claiming to be from your bank is NOT from your bank and is trying to scam you out of your username and password so they can steal all your money. And buying this "Hot Stock" WONT make you rich, it will only make the person telling you to buy it rich.)
4.Spam (No, buying this pill from this internet pharmacy located god-knows-where WONT make your penis any larger. And anyhow, having a larger penis doesnt make one shred of difference. Also, playing this online casino WONT make you rich.)
5.Security of private information, emails, chat etc. (Regular email can be read by anyone, start using Encryption to make your mail hard to read.)
If we can educate Internet newbies about these 5 things, the Internet as a whole will be a better place
Remember that Windows Media Player is (currently) 2 things, the CODECS (i.e. DirectShow) that programs like Premier and such use (this is what e.g. linux media players using windows binary dlls for some WMP formats use) and the interface (the ugly thing that you actually use to play media)
To me, the ideal solution for media players is this:
1.MS opens up the complete specs for codecs under an "anyone can use this info" licence. This would allow anyone to write a codec and allow anyone to write a front-end that uses whatever DirectShow codecs are installed.
And 2.The UI component of WMP is either removed or at minumum made an optional install.
The problem I have with the "install other players" argument is, which players?
Shipping bloat-ware-laiden Real doesnt benifit anyone except Real. Shipping QuickTime is good but it only benifits Apple.
I think another possible remedy is to force MS to publish all the specs for their WMP file formats under an "anyone can use this" licence. That way, even if Windows Media does become the domanent file format, it doesnt extend the MS monopoly since Linux, OSX and whatever else can play them.
Especially those serving paid content.
One common argument is "real is the standard", "real is dominant", "real has the largest installed base" etc.
But, with WMP getting more installed base on windows, if that is the main argument, why not use Windows Media instead? Or Quicktime? (not as much installed base as Real or Windows Media but the player comes with OSX and is free to install on windows plus I think the streaming server and mabie the encoder is free too)
Internet Explorers MIME type handling is, has always been and probobly will always be broken.
The correct way to handle MIME types is to treat them as gospel.
If the web server says its text/plain, treat it as text/plain regardless of content.
Before it becomes law and is in effect.
Therefore, contact your representatives and senators (particularly those senators who hold the ballance of power and are able to influence the passage or blocking of this) and let them know that the FTA is bad (not just for the IP laws but for the way it does absoultly nothing worthwile for our farmers and generally gives far more to America (and especially large american companies) than it does to Australia)
Unlike America where the passage of the FTA is a done deal (as long as the unmarked bundles of bills in the unmarked black briefcases get into the hands of the polititions that they are supposed to be bribes to anyway), its by no means certain that the FTA will pass in australia.
One thing to remember is that, unlike many bills that have passed through the senate after the government did deals with the minor parties and aggreed to some amendments, the FTA cant be ammended and has to be passed as-is.
Firstly, all ISPs (and corperations, schools, unis and so on) should block port 25 by default.
Those that want to run a mailserver for legitimate reasons can do so but anyone who hasnt speicificly said "I want to run a SMTP server on my connection" will be prevented from doing so (this would cut out 99% of the spam comming from spam zombie boxes)
Second, close open relays (if you need to have an "open machine" run some kind of SMTP authentication)
Thirdly, implement SPF for more hosts and more clients (if you want to run your own mail server with xxx@mydomain.com addresses but relay through mailservers at ISP, work etc, just add those SMTP servers to the SPF record)
And forthly, be more proactive in blacklisting ISPs that are known spam havens (if enough people block the IP ranges of bulletproofspamhosting.com, spammers wont be able to get their messages through and bulletproofspamhosting.com will go out of business when the spammers leave)
If its a regular ISP with non-spam customers as well, pressure from the non-spam customers (especially if those non-spam customers are big) might convince the ISP to dump the spamers.
Eventually, if this happens enough, ISPs will realize that hosting spamers means that they will be blacklisted.
Here in Australia, we have decent broadband service and a fair deal of choice.
Telstra (phone company, was government owned, now partially privatized) owns all the phone network and offers phone and DSL service over it. They are regulated by the government (which unlike in America, otherwise known as the United States of Big Corporations, actually has some teeth)
Also, other companies (and there are a fair number) offer DSL over the telstra wires.
And, guess what... Telstra is NOT the best provider in terms of service.
We recently signed up with TPG Internet and we are getting 512k down 128k up for AU$80 a month (not sure how that converts to $US).
We also have totally unlimited bandwidth with no caps.
Anyone know why it was shut down?
Were there any efforts made to see if someone else wanted to take it all over?
Actually, Microsoft made many changes between NT 40. and NT 5.0 (i.e. windows 2000)
For example, they added full support for Plug and Play, Power Management and many other under-the-hood improvements.
Only difference is that in prison they dont let you read slashdot
The point is that Microsoft has been declared (in a US court no less) a monopoly company.
Microsoft is using Windows to extend its monopoly in areas like Internet Search (MSN search), Instant Messaging (MSN messenger), Web Browsers (Internet Explorer), Email programs (Outlook Express), Media Players (Windows Media) etc.
Firstly, by removing (or at least making optional) those parts of windows that can be, it enables OEMs, knowledgable users (e.g. when setting up windows for family) and so on to swap them out. For example, you could have different messenger or media player or whatever.
On the other hand, forcing MS to remove IE wont make difference since its not possible to run windows without all the IE dlls and stuff (the dlls I listed above). Therefore, since we cant remove IE & its rendering engine, the solution to help people to compete is to:
1.Allow anyone to use 100% of the functionality in the IE dlls (same as how MS can do that)
2.Allow for replacement User Interfaces that replace the IE user interface with something else that uses the same MS core HTML rendering engine
3.Allow someone to make a new HTML rendering engine that can replace the MS one (especially so for WINE/ReactOS/etc)
etc
Since microsoft has a monopoly with its windows product, it can (in a fair number of areas) control file formats and network protocols. By forcing them to open up things like HTML help, Windows Media formats and other "Microsoft" formats as well as network protocols like Microsoft Server Authentication, Microsoft Windows Networking (i.e. the My Network Places stuff), it means that Microsoft wont be able to use their monopoly on windows to force people who want to talk those file formats or protocols to use windows.
MS is basicly saying the folowing:
"If you want windows, you have to take all this other stuff as well" which therefore means less people will be using non-ms alternatives to the "other stuff" MS is including.
Also, by keeping interfaces/document formats/network protocols private, it becomes harder to use that non-MS "other stuff".
e.g.Microsoft is using its Windows monopoly to pre-install Windows Media Player.
From there, it is then using that to push its Windows Media Audio and Windows Media Video formats. Currently, if you want to play the latest version of those files on an X86 machine, you need to use WMP. By forcing MS to open the format of Windows Media Audio and Windows Media Video, they are not allowed to use their Windows monopoly to create a Monopoly on media players (since any player would be able to handle WMP formats)
1.Remove any references to MSN (so they cant push their MSN internet service or e.g. MSN search .NET binaries etc etc). Ditto for all their "secret" APIs (such as apis in MSHTML.DLL, SHELL32.DLL, SHLWAPI.DLL, SHDOCVW.DLL, SHFOLDER.DLL, WININET.DLL, COMCTL32.DLL, ADVAPI32.DLL, JSCRIPT.DLL, VBSCRIPT.DLL, .NET runtime, .NET libraries, DirectX, Media Player libs and whatever else) .NET to attack mono)
2.Make MSN messenger something that you can choose to install or choose not to install (i.e. if you dont want it, you can choose not to install it and install another messenger or no messenger at all)
3.Completly open up the Windows Media Player codec layer such that anyone can write WMP codecs and anyone can use those codecs in their app (making it so that e.g. games can use the codecs for displaying full-screen video clips or playing game audio would be a nice thing also, I dont know if its already possible or not)
4.Detatch the Windows Media Player UI from windows and from the codecs and make it an optional install.
5.Force microsoft to have one OEM price and one OEM contract. Anyone that wants windows OEM can buy at the same price (as long as they are bundling with a PC, they qualify for OEM price).
6.MS not able to dictate what OEMs can/cant do.
For example, let OEMs install whatever they want alongside windows (i.e. Linux, Mozilla or whatever else)
7.Publish all the communications protocols used by anything that comes on the windows CD under a clear "anyone can use this with no restrictions" licence. Also, publish all of their various data storage formats under the same sort of licence (e.g. NTFS filesystem specs, MS office document formats, MS media files, regular and HTML help document files,
That way, anyone can talk to/use their HTML renderer, internet DLLs and whatever else.
Also, it would (presumably) allow one to write a new HTML renderer (e.g. based on gecko) that could replace the MS one.
8.Force MS to unbundle Outlook Express, publish all the data formats that OE uses to store stuff, etc etc etc. (so that other mail programs can be used instead if you want to)
8.Force MS to completly implement the current W3C standards for HTML, XML and such. This includes complete support for ALL parts of formats like PNG
9.MS not allowed to use patents to protect their monopoly in the OS space (for example, cant use patents on
and 10.MS not allowed to use influence to try and spread products inside EU (e.g. applying pressure to governments/corps who are trying to decide between windows and linux)
These are all important but the most important IMO is point 7 (i.e. the "open all their secrets" thing) since that will level the playingfield as far as competitors go.
For example, Mozilla will be able to talk MS server authentication on all platforms, with no licence conditions or strings attatched.
And things like Linux and ReactOS will have full information to be able to read NTFS file systems.
And so on.
(although I have never owned an IBM drive so that could be why :)
:)
Only time I know of where I lost hard disk data was with a 40gb (I think it was 40gb, may have been a 20gb though) and that failure coincided with a blown motherboard & a fair amount of repair cost.
Plus, there was what looked like a burn mark on one of the large surface-mount ICs on the hard disk circut board. So, in this case, I can say that it probobly wasnt a manfacturing defect
If they just documented all the APIs in such dlls as shlwapi.dll, shell32.dll, comctl32.dll, uxtheme.dll, mshtml.dll, shdocvw.dll, user23.dll, comdlg32.dll, kernel32.dll, ntdll.dll, ddraw.dll and so on, then all these problems with "MS has secret APIs" will go away.
:)
It does mean that MS wont be able to remove those APIs later but I have seen windows versions from NT4 through to XP and MS didnt remove any APIs in those versions. (in the core dlls anyway)
Plus, completly documenting these APIs would help projects like ReactOS and WINE
As for the usage of the "undocumented" apis, they are used for 3 things:
1.bits of windows to talk to each other
2.internally to the shell (i.e. things used by explorer.exe to talk to dlls like shlwapi.dll and shell32.dll and such)
and 3.used by MS middleware to talk to windows (for example, iexplore.exe is just a wrapper of sorts around a function called IEWinMain in shdocvw.dll)
Note that shdocvw.dll, mshtml.dll and other such dlls are most definatly "windows" and not "middleware" (since a fair chunk of the functions in them ARE documented in the Platform SDK and on MSDN but not all of the functions)
Regarding product placement in games, some things that I believe should be done:
1.Advertising should only appear in places it normally appears. For example, if you are moving through a subway or train station, put billboards in the places one normally finds them. Or put billboards alongside the road in a driving game like Cruisn USA. Or like how the Need For Speed games feature real cars like porsche, ferrari etc.
2.If you are simulating a real-world present-day situation (such as a sports stadium & sports teams or racetrack & race teams), use the same ads as the real world situation. One example of this being done wrong is the EA game V8 Challenge. In this game, there is a simulation of the Mount Panorama racetrack at Bathurst (in australia). One part of this racetrack has a bridge of some kind that crosses over the track. On the real racetrack there is (and was when V8 Challenge was created) an advertisment for Dunlop tyres on this bridge. But in V8 Challenge, the buffoons at EA put Bridgestone logos on the bridge instead and ruined things.
Same with sports teams and etc. For example, just like how Ferrari is sponsered by various companies (tic-tac, shell, vodafone etc) in real life, the Ferraris in should have the correct sponsors logos in the right place. (although in a few cases there can be issues e.g. where cigarette ads are still legal for some motorsports but where they arent legal in the games)
3.Dont have player interation with the products being advertised. For example, a game where you have to buy food from a KFC or whatever to move through the game is bad. In cases where real-world items are used for gameplay, dont just have one brand (e.g. if you are going to have real-world cars, have several makes)
This only applies in games where there is a defined "player". (e.g. a RPG or a game like "the sims"). Having e.g. a KFC store or a Shell gas station pop up in a Sim City city for example would be fine since its not being directly used by the player.
4.Dont put ads in the wrong setting. For example, having an ad for Nike in a medieval themed game would be totally stupid since nike shoes never existed back then. "future earth" games not based on any particular universe can have product placement and get away with it as long as it looks like it would still be used in the future (in the future, people still enjoy a refreshing ice cold Coca-Cola or whatever it is)
and 5.Dont put the ads or products into the dialog or storyline. For example, dont have a character in a cutscene say "Lets go get a Coke" or whatever.
But doesnt this treaty have to be passed by both the US congress and the Australian parliment before this (and the other measures in it) actually become law?
We all know how most congressmen only care about money (the same money paid by big american corperations to Bush to get him to push for these nasty things in the first place) so I suspect getting the trade aggreement passed through congress would be trivial.
However, in australia, it has to pass through the Senate. Now is the time for all aussies to pressue the parliment NOT to pass this totally UNFAIR aggreement that basicly gives the US everything it wanted for nothing in return. Just like the senate has rejected or ammended several other contraveral/crappy pieces of Howard Government legislation (much to the annoyance of Howard), it can reject (being a treaty like this, they cant ammend it) the FTA. (at least I think so, I dont fully understand how this kind of thing works here in australia)
In any case, regardless of what happens, one way to protest (against this and other things including the general "bush says jump, howard says how high" moves that have been going on lately) is to not vote for howard or his party.
Why wont the farmers in america accept a "gradual reduction of protection over 15-20 years"?
Reducing the protection gradually over that long a period would give them plenty of time to either get better (and still be able to survive in a lower-subsidy/lower-tarrif/lower-protection environment or if thats not possible, to get out of farming into something else.
1.Microsoft deliberatly dragging its heels on updates and the editor (probobly either to get more sales of Halo XBOX or mabie so that halo 2 comes out first)
2.Microsoft preventing Bungie from doing the ports to PC and MAC inhouse (probobly because MS wanted them to get working on the next XBOX thingo MS had lined up)
3.Rediculous hardware requirements for both ports (brought on because microsoft insisted that the ports contain all the graphics effect fluff and crap that the XBOX version has and then some)
4.Sucky multiplayer (because the netcode isnt optomized for transfer over a low-bandwidth link like dialup or low-bandwitdh broadband)
and 5.Lack of content because MS is deliberatly holding back the halo editor
I have learnt one thing about MS
If there is a game that is ultimatly "owned" by Microsoft and it has both a version on XBOX and a version or versions on other platforms, avoid the other platform versions since MS will deliberatly make them sucky compared to the XBOX version so they can sell more XBOXes
1.the stuff Gearbox has been sending for QA is too buggy to release (and after learning from the flak MS got from the last buggy patches for the game, they are listening).
2.The people running halo QA at MS are incompetent
3.Not enough money or personell allocated to halo QA.
or (the conspiricy theory) 4.Microsoft doesnt want the editor and the "patches that make the game better" to appear since that will make Halo PC better than Halo XBOX and lead to more sales of Halo PC and less sales of Halo XBOX (and therefore potentially less XBOXes).
I suspect that Microsoft is waiting for the (XBL enabled) Halo 2 to appear so that people wanting a good halo online experience are forced to get Halo 2 (plus an XBOX and an XBL subscription) and then, once its been out for a while, then release the patches.
Ultimatly, the only reason MS wanted Halo was because they wanted "a game that would sell XBOXes". Thats why they screwed gamers with the PC/MAC ports and thats why they continue to screw gamers with the patches and the editor.
BTW, I was able to play completly through the PC version of the game (forget which difficulty level though) with (as far as I can remember), no major crashes or lockups (this is on windows XP).
Backwards compatibility is key, look at how many PS2s were sold because they can run PS1 games also.
New specs:
1.Pentium 4 at something like 3GHz (by the time XBOX2 comes out, 3GHz chips will have come down in price)
2.at least 512 megs of RAM (its not like RAM is expensive)
3.hard disk at something like 20gb or 40gb or whatever
4.complete security (based on RSA or something better if its available by then) with the BIOS engineered inside some kind of unremovable, unflashable, unreplacable surface-mount chip (making it so that the BIOS cant be fiddled with without screwing the XBOX2 completly should be possible).
Most people here probobly despise DRM, copy protection and stuff (Even I dont like it much) but the fact is, the XBOX2 is going to have copy protection like this anyway (to stop all the hackers).
5.a drive that can play exisiting XBOX disks, DVDs, music CDs as well as special XBOX2 disks (using blu-ray or some other high-density standard to make them harder to copy). Add special features to the drive or the BIOS so that it will reject any disk with a signature indicating that its a recordable media (CD-R, DVD-R etc). This makes piracy even harder and also prevents running of pirate DVDs and music disks.
6.a good graphics chip (perhaps of GeForceFX level if the price has come down enough by then)
7.LAN card and drivers to allow broadband out of the box. Remove the need for an XBOX live kit to be purchased, instead, you purchase XBOX2 live subscription time.
Basicly, in order to play XBL games or download content for XBL games via XBOX2 live, you would just get a subscription which would cost a certain amount per month. Exactly how you sign up and pay I dont know but it should be designed so that you can sign-up online via a PC and also online through a special XBOX interface (i.e. plug your XBOX into the broadband link, run the special signup option and sign up with a credit card). Options for those that dont want to trust online signups would also be available. (i.e. its gotta be as easy as possible to sign up)
The XBOX2 should not allow email, web or anything like that (for one thing, previous attempts at "use the internet from your TV" bombed horribly)
8.complete backwards compatibility with existing XBOX games (only the legal origonals of course).
9.to prevent hacks, the hard disk and memcards would be encrypted with a strong encryption mechanisim with the actual encryption being inside the BIOS (which if you remember is supposed to be unreadable making it difficult to just disassemble the BIOS and get the encryption)
and 10.make good games with good online playability (if the libraries are done right, adding online play should be simple with all the tricky bits handled by the network layers)
1.they should be forced to reveal on a public website with no cost or licence restrictions their "propriatory" file formats. (exactly which formats would have to be decided by a sutable panel made up of legal people and technical people but should include all the office file formats like word, excel, powerpoint, access). Also, all their "secret" APIs (for example hooks into the shell) and all their "secret" network protocols (for example, the various windows-only authentication for MS IIS and MS proxy server
2.they should be forced to make all their contracts with OEMs public and be banned from having secret contracts with OEMs.
3.they should be forced to sell OEM windows at one price and one price only to ALL OEMs.
4.they should be prohibited from restricting OEMs who ship (or want to ship, talk about shipping etc) systems with operating systems other than windows, systems with no operating system installed at all or systems containing windows in conjunction with one or more other opreating systems.
5.same as for 4. but for application software (i.e. OEM pre-installs mozilla or netscape or whatever else)
Basicly, force them open on the OEM desktop plus force them to give up the secrets that will allow their competitors (including Open Source) to talk to, interact with and share data with those products (windows, office, IE, IIS, MS servers, media player, MSN messenger and etc) that microsoft currently enjoys a monopoly on or that microsoft is currently using is monopoly power to push.
I am just pointing out that if its possible for movies, why not for games?
Are there people who are complaining that should be banned or restricted in ways other than by the self-regulated MPAA rating system (by which the MPAA assigns a rating to every movie and then most theaters seem to enforce that rating)?
The industry should get together with the retailers and the various groups involved in this (including the "violent computer games are bad, ban them" crowd) and come up with a form of self-regulation and self-policing that ensures that minors dont get violent games (or at least that makes it harder for minors to get violent games) and that keeps the "violent computer games are bad" crowd at bay.
There has to be a middle ground between what we have now and "government mandated laws" (which is what these idiots want)
Just aggree on a standard classification system like there is for movies (best solution would be to just use the existing ESRB ratings system) then make that system legally binding on publishers, developers, stores and gamers?
It means that if kids walk into EB or Wal-Mart or whatever and want to buy , they will need to show that they are old enough to play it.
Then, it gives those who think that is too violent a way to complain. All they need to do is to complain to the ESRB that the rating is wrong and if enough people complain, it can be re-evaluated.