Well, I have coded under windows, though I'll be the first to admit that it's an experience I like to avoid.:)
I generally take responses to my posts very personally. Perhaps it's a flaw of mine, but even in a forum as large as slashdot, where identities are lost among the hordes of people posting each day, I try to remain an individual conversing with other individuals.
bggggbggggIcons in the corner don't count. I'm talking about things like the icon bar. KDE has applets for such things, but Windows doesn't have any equivilant.
Once again, not too hard to do. Though, that actually takes some programming skills.
Frustration is a little different from "really angry", isn't it?:P
I saw the market before MS started putting shit into their OSes(around Dos 4). The user was the one who dictated what was installed on a machine. I tend to think that things should be lead back in that direction. Decent manuals which outline what must be installed would be important, but just saying "well, the user might need this, let's give it to them and make it impossible to uninstall!" doesn't seem productive -- especially considering that it's those same tools which IT professionals are limited by when we have specific requirements concerning size or functionality.
That was beautiful. I wholeheartedly agree, and wish others would think this way as well. I'm goddamn sick and tired of convicted criminals being let off with a proverbial "slap on the wrist with a healing stick"(my proverb:) ).
I can throw insults too! You're a fucking moron. Boy, that was fun.
No man, I'm serious. No matter what the circumstances, if the machine just not having a web browser makes you "really angry", you need help. It's just not something you should worry about. You can get the browser for free in any PC Gamer CD, so it's not like the world will fall or you will spend weeks delaying an important project because you need to put a web browser on manually.
Why shouldn't the file manager, disk defragmenter, or file system be separate products? Because they're basic parts of the computer experience in the Windows world.
Actually, I believe these *SHOULD* be seperate products(except for the file manager, which is a basic tool which is needed to actually access files using a GUI--the graphical equivilant to the command line.). They tend to include a proprietery version of any given piece of software which becomes even remotely useful in the basic Windows installation, without any option to uninstall, often displacing companies whose livelyhood depends on the sale of such inventive products.
It's really not all that hard. Of course, you have to actually know a little about how Windows works to do it. Which is where actually doing some windows programming in C/C++ helps.
Please don't do that. I'm not sure if it was intentional, but you've got a real good "Programmers are holier than thou" attitude going on, and it's kind of insulting. I have coded in Windows using C, I do understand how windows works, but it's irrelevant. I was merely stating an occurance where MS has an advantage due to code others don't have access to. There is no addBrowserCrapToBar() command in the windows API, so this certainly qualifies.
I can't have a Ford engine installed in my new Chevy. I can't have the doors and seats removed.
Is it a matter of "can't", or is it a matter of "don't want to"? It's certainly possible to du these things(even the ford/chevy thing is possible, though difficult), and in fact, in the automotive industry, there is an entire industry around changing the components of the cars.
I installed a older version of NT a while ago that didn't have a browser and that made me really angry
This is naught but proof that you anger far too easily(and should really seek professional help). Why shouldn't the browser be a seperate product? Should I be really angry that I have to install MS Office and Norton Antivirus, instead of having it installed by default? Should I be pissed off that I can't run Java applications in a default XP installation? Maybe they should install Cygwin for us by default as well?
The real reason that unix-type systems aren't being hit is that they are much less susceptible.
I'll second this. After reading the logs on my Apache server, I realize just how stupid the bugs in IIS were. Some were hardly impressive(in fact, they reflected poorly upon MS for allowing such stupid things to be done with their programs.)
Of course, I haven't been attacked with anything which looks like it affect Apache, so I could turn out to be proven wrong, but really, the fact that a regular http/1.1 GET command can root the system without exploiting any buffer overflows or anything is sad!
I don't think anything would have happened which could be seen as significant. The only machine I've ever seen which was affected by Y2K was an old IBM 286. Even other 286s were y2k compliant. Very few x86 boxes would have been affected. Perhaps big banks would have, but I think they were aware of the problem without the hysteria surrounding Y2K, as was just about anyone who stood to lose a lot of money if their systems went down. They would have been ready, just like they were.
On the other hand, y2k made great shock news. "EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT! COMPUTER GEEKS ARE ALL EVIL HACKERS AND THEY'VE SCREWED YOU! WORLD SET TO END AT MIDNIGHT, JAN 1,2000!!!"
The media didn't deserve to get off scott free for that like they did. The fear mongering which happened pre-y2k was just plain wrong.
Well, if I can give up my fair-use rights in the Windows EULA, and my right to free speech in the FrontPage EULA, certainly it's not too far fetched for another company to say that they aren't to be held responsible for the laws of the land either.
I like that. I'll do the same thing.
"By reading this agreement, you hereby agree that SJ Zero shall not be held responsible for any crimes committed by him or involving him. Breaking this agreement will give Sj Zero the right to poke you with a pointed stick until(but not before) you apologize, crying like a baby."
So much for the great blackout. I decided to forget about that after I realized that there were more posts in the first 24 hours of the blackout than in the week before.:) I participated this long because I thought it would be fun to shake the system a bit, but it's obvious that no shakeage is happening. It was fun for a few hours, but a week would just be boring.:)
Why bother with inconveniencing web authors in any way(though I'll admit that using JPGs is hardly a huge inconvenience when most already use it) when you can just install mod_gzip on the web server, and use anything from a 8 bit GIF to a 24 bit BMP(sans compression at the file level) and get relatively good compression regardless?
I think AMD was just slow in getting the Athlon to the market. The K6-2 was meant to compete with the p2, I have no doubt about that, and for what it did, it was great. Even without a pipeline, the k6-2 and k6-3 at least matched the fastest Pentium MMX in the worst case scenario. The Athlon definitely was a competitor for the Pentium 3 line, judging from when it appeared.
the naming of the k6-3 was mere co-incidence. It was a slightly beefier K6-2. nothing more. I think it was meant primarily as a mobile solution.
Which actually proves the point. IBM is likely creating a product that is higher quality (lower noise, better density etc.) which cost more to make, but selling at the same price. This leads to thinner profit margins. Add to that the cost of R&D for all these cool gizmos they are throwing in, and the profit for the HD is much lower than Maxtor's.
I don't know...Maxtor drives have been of quite good quality lately. My 60GB drive with fluidic bearings is inaudible, it's fast, and overall, it's pretty damn good. Cheap too. At the very least, current drives are superior in every way to maxtor drives of the past.:)
Hmmm...Half life is based on Quake II. The source code for Quake II is available from id Software. As is the code for Quake I. Doom as well. Even Wolfenstien 3d makes the list.
Jesus! I've seen more patting on the back lately for mod makers, and frankly, it's making me sick. With Microsoft talking about paying modders for their work, I think many people don't understand what will happen when all this money and fame goes to a modders head.
Alien Doom. Now there was a mod...:)
though ZanZan is really f*cking cool for a Doom mod!
AMD has shown they support linux(in the demo for their new proc), they just happen to support MS as well. I see why you'd want to erase AMD from memory for this, but if you decided to boycott anyone who hasn't been in bed with MS at some point, the industry would be barren. Companies must play nice with Microsoft, and at times, even whore themselves out to MS. It's all a part of a marketplace where an entire industry is monopolized by a single, aggressive and predatory company.
As we saw with Intel just a few years ago, the big monopoly CAN be taken down.
Hate to break it to you, but Intel still has a huge market share compared to AMD. I don't have the numbers, but it's in the 60-80% range. AMD isn't a new company either, nor is their superiority a relatively new phenomenon. In fact, only AMDs answer to the pentium (k5, k6, k6-2, k6-3) were weak compared to intel counterparts(though by sheer brute force, the later K6-2 and K6-3s were better than the 200MMXs from Intel, even in the FP department). Their 386 and 486 were measurably faster at the same clock speeds than Intel counterparts.
If there is a better product (ie Linux) at a better price, it can take over the market.
It can, but in recent years, it hasn't. Linux is being squeezed out of most of the niche markets it's in by MS, despite the valiant efforts of thousands of volunteers. MS marketshare in servers has been growing, despite all predictions(Winners don't use MS in a mission critical setting. Learn it. Live it.). MS desktop share has never been challenged, even by the most powerful of competitors. It's just not going to happen.
Similarly, despite AMD providing a comparable product at a significant discount, they are still having problems breaking into the market.
I don't have to remind you of which processor has the best performance right now.
I'll agree with you about the cases, but it would be even easier if they opened from the front, like a book, rather than from the back. Being able to work on a machine without pulling it away from the wall would be quite a bit more convenient than they have it right now.
'86 TRS-80 COCO2/w enhanced color BASIC '89 C64 '93 8088 with Herc mono screen, 640k expansion card '94 added 80286 board and chip to the aforementioned system. '95 80386DX 25 with a bad floppy controller. '95 80386SX 16 with the 387 copro chip '96 80486SLC 40 which was too unstable to use '97 Pentium 90, 16 MBs of RAM, Avance Logic video '98 K5 PR90 '99 Pentium 166, S3 ViRGE GX 3d decellerator '00 K6-2 400(@60mhz*6x=360), 32 MB of RAM, S3 Savage4 GT PCI '02 Duron 900, 128MB DDR RAM, Nvidia Geforce 2 MX. PCChips Motherboard. 60 gigs of HD.
Damn kids these days, starting on their P133s, they don't know what a computer is capable of!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I have coded under windows, though I'll be the first to admit that it's an experience I like to avoid. :)
I generally take responses to my posts very personally. Perhaps it's a flaw of mine, but even in a forum as large as slashdot, where identities are lost among the hordes of people posting each day, I try to remain an individual conversing with other individuals.
bggggbggggIcons in the corner don't count. I'm talking about things like the icon bar. KDE has applets for such things, but Windows doesn't have any equivilant.
Once again, not too hard to do. Though, that actually takes some programming skills.
Why did I get two smartass comments like this?
Frustration is a little different from "really angry", isn't it? :P
I saw the market before MS started putting shit into their OSes(around Dos 4). The user was the one who dictated what was installed on a machine. I tend to think that things should be lead back in that direction. Decent manuals which outline what must be installed would be important, but just saying "well, the user might need this, let's give it to them and make it impossible to uninstall!" doesn't seem productive -- especially considering that it's those same tools which IT professionals are limited by when we have specific requirements concerning size or functionality.
That was beautiful. I wholeheartedly agree, and wish others would think this way as well. I'm goddamn sick and tired of convicted criminals being let off with a proverbial "slap on the wrist with a healing stick"(my proverb :) ).
I can throw insults too! You're a fucking moron. Boy, that was fun.
No man, I'm serious. No matter what the circumstances, if the machine just not having a web browser makes you "really angry", you need help. It's just not something you should worry about. You can get the browser for free in any PC Gamer CD, so it's not like the world will fall or you will spend weeks delaying an important project because you need to put a web browser on manually.
Why shouldn't the file manager, disk defragmenter, or file system be separate products?
Because they're basic parts of the computer experience in the Windows world.
Actually, I believe these *SHOULD* be seperate products(except for the file manager, which is a basic tool which is needed to actually access files using a GUI--the graphical equivilant to the command line.). They tend to include a proprietery version of any given piece of software which becomes even remotely useful in the basic Windows installation, without any option to uninstall, often displacing companies whose livelyhood depends on the sale of such inventive products.
It's really not all that hard. Of course, you have to actually know a little about how Windows works to do it. Which is where actually doing some windows programming in C/C++ helps.
Please don't do that. I'm not sure if it was intentional, but you've got a real good "Programmers are holier than thou" attitude going on, and it's kind of insulting. I have coded in Windows using C, I do understand how windows works, but it's irrelevant. I was merely stating an occurance where MS has an advantage due to code others don't have access to. There is no addBrowserCrapToBar() command in the windows API, so this certainly qualifies.
I can't have a Ford engine installed in my new Chevy. I can't have the doors and seats removed.
Is it a matter of "can't", or is it a matter of "don't want to"? It's certainly possible to du these things(even the ford/chevy thing is possible, though difficult), and in fact, in the automotive industry, there is an entire industry around changing the components of the cars.
I installed a older version of NT a while ago that didn't have a browser and that made me really angry
This is naught but proof that you anger far too easily(and should really seek professional help). Why shouldn't the browser be a seperate product? Should I be really angry that I have to install MS Office and Norton Antivirus, instead of having it installed by default? Should I be pissed off that I can't run Java applications in a default XP installation? Maybe they should install Cygwin for us by default as well?
How about IE4 altering the entire Windows 95 shell? I *know* there would be a lot of idiots using this feature if it was a public thing...
Proverb: Those who forget the past are doomed to call those who do crackheads.
The PRO edition of 98lite enables you to get rid of far more than just IE. The list is huge, though I don't really want to look it up myself. :)
http://98lite.net/
The real reason that unix-type systems aren't being hit is that they are much less susceptible.
I'll second this. After reading the logs on my Apache server, I realize just how stupid the bugs in IIS were. Some were hardly impressive(in fact, they reflected poorly upon MS for allowing such stupid things to be done with their programs.)
Of course, I haven't been attacked with anything which looks like it affect Apache, so I could turn out to be proven wrong, but really, the fact that a regular http/1.1 GET command can root the system without exploiting any buffer overflows or anything is sad!
I don't think anything would have happened which could be seen as significant. The only machine I've ever seen which was affected by Y2K was an old IBM 286. Even other 286s were y2k compliant. Very few x86 boxes would have been affected. Perhaps big banks would have, but I think they were aware of the problem without the hysteria surrounding Y2K, as was just about anyone who stood to lose a lot of money if their systems went down. They would have been ready, just like they were.
On the other hand, y2k made great shock news. "EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT! COMPUTER GEEKS ARE ALL EVIL HACKERS AND THEY'VE SCREWED YOU! WORLD SET TO END AT MIDNIGHT, JAN 1,2000!!!"
The media didn't deserve to get off scott free for that like they did. The fear mongering which happened pre-y2k was just plain wrong.
This is the internet, not the serengeti for christs' sake!
Computers and the Internet are tools. people are suprised when they realize how high maintinence those tools are. I know I was.
42...
and...
um...
Glenn?
Well, if I can give up my fair-use rights in the Windows EULA, and my right to free speech in the FrontPage EULA, certainly it's not too far fetched for another company to say that they aren't to be held responsible for the laws of the land either.
:) I participated this long because I thought it would be fun to shake the system a bit, but it's obvious that no shakeage is happening. It was fun for a few hours, but a week would just be boring. :)
I like that. I'll do the same thing.
"By reading this agreement, you hereby agree that SJ Zero shall not be held responsible for any crimes committed by him or involving him. Breaking this agreement will give Sj Zero the right to poke you with a pointed stick until(but not before) you apologize, crying like a baby."
So much for the great blackout. I decided to forget about that after I realized that there were more posts in the first 24 hours of the blackout than in the week before.
Why bother with inconveniencing web authors in any way(though I'll admit that using JPGs is hardly a huge inconvenience when most already use it) when you can just install mod_gzip on the web server, and use anything from a 8 bit GIF to a 24 bit BMP(sans compression at the file level) and get relatively good compression regardless?
er....K-Meleon?
I'm afraid not. K-Meleon is significantly faster than most other browsers in every circumstance I've tested it on.
I think AMD was just slow in getting the Athlon to the market. The K6-2 was meant to compete with the p2, I have no doubt about that, and for what it did, it was great. Even without a pipeline, the k6-2 and k6-3 at least matched the fastest Pentium MMX in the worst case scenario. The Athlon definitely was a competitor for the Pentium 3 line, judging from when it appeared.
the naming of the k6-3 was mere co-incidence. It was a slightly beefier K6-2. nothing more. I think it was meant primarily as a mobile solution.
Which actually proves the point. IBM is likely creating a product that is higher quality (lower noise, better density etc.) which cost more to make, but selling at the same price. This leads to thinner profit margins. Add to that the cost of R&D for all these cool gizmos they are throwing in, and the profit for the HD is much lower than Maxtor's.
:)
I don't know...Maxtor drives have been of quite good quality lately. My 60GB drive with fluidic bearings is inaudible, it's fast, and overall, it's pretty damn good. Cheap too. At the very least, current drives are superior in every way to maxtor drives of the past.
Hmmm...Half life is based on Quake II. The source code for Quake II is available from id Software. As is the code for Quake I. Doom as well. Even Wolfenstien 3d makes the list.
Where was I?
Jesus! I've seen more patting on the back lately for mod makers, and frankly, it's making me sick. With Microsoft talking about paying modders for their work, I think many people don't understand what will happen when all this money and fame goes to a modders head.
:)
Alien Doom. Now there was a mod...
though ZanZan is really f*cking cool for a Doom mod!
AMD has shown they support linux(in the demo for their new proc), they just happen to support MS as well. I see why you'd want to erase AMD from memory for this, but if you decided to boycott anyone who hasn't been in bed with MS at some point, the industry would be barren. Companies must play nice with Microsoft, and at times, even whore themselves out to MS. It's all a part of a marketplace where an entire industry is monopolized by a single, aggressive and predatory company.
As we saw with Intel just a few years ago, the big monopoly CAN be taken down.
Hate to break it to you, but Intel still has a huge market share compared to AMD. I don't have the numbers, but it's in the 60-80% range. AMD isn't a new company either, nor is their superiority a relatively new phenomenon. In fact, only AMDs answer to the pentium (k5, k6, k6-2, k6-3) were weak compared to intel counterparts(though by sheer brute force, the later K6-2 and K6-3s were better than the 200MMXs from Intel, even in the FP department). Their 386 and 486 were measurably faster at the same clock speeds than Intel counterparts.
If there is a better product (ie Linux) at a better price, it can take over the market.
It can, but in recent years, it hasn't. Linux is being squeezed out of most of the niche markets it's in by MS, despite the valiant efforts of thousands of volunteers. MS marketshare in servers has been growing, despite all predictions(Winners don't use MS in a mission critical setting. Learn it. Live it.). MS desktop share has never been challenged, even by the most powerful of competitors. It's just not going to happen.
Similarly, despite AMD providing a comparable product at a significant discount, they are still having problems breaking into the market.
I don't have to remind you of which processor has the best performance right now.
I wish it mattered.
I'll agree with you about the cases, but it would be even easier if they opened from the front, like a book, rather than from the back. Being able to work on a machine without pulling it away from the wall would be quite a bit more convenient than they have it right now.
Computer histories are always fun. :)
/w enhanced color BASIC
'86 TRS-80 COCO2
'89 C64
'93 8088 with Herc mono screen, 640k expansion card
'94 added 80286 board and chip to the aforementioned system.
'95 80386DX 25 with a bad floppy controller.
'95 80386SX 16 with the 387 copro chip
'96 80486SLC 40 which was too unstable to use
'97 Pentium 90, 16 MBs of RAM, Avance Logic video
'98 K5 PR90
'99 Pentium 166, S3 ViRGE GX 3d decellerator
'00 K6-2 400(@60mhz*6x=360), 32 MB of RAM, S3 Savage4 GT PCI
'02 Duron 900, 128MB DDR RAM, Nvidia Geforce 2 MX. PCChips Motherboard. 60 gigs of HD.
Damn kids these days, starting on their P133s, they don't know what a computer is capable of!
So to anyone who's surprised by this payola, what rock have you been hiding under? The review business is as corrupt as politics.
Even....PCXL?
But....Ass...Awards....
...and mocking and ridiculing games of ass...
...