Actually XP always supported PAE, PAE is even required to enable the NX bit which XP will use by default on processors which support it. XP from SP2 onwards has a licensing restriction which causes it to ignore any address space above 4GB, but that is entirely different from not supporting PAE. See http://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/windows/license/memory.htm
And categorise by vendor rather than what the application does, because trying to promote your company brand is more important than letting users easily find the applications they need.
A million infected devices, vs roughly 1 billion android devices activated with google (http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/122459-1-5m-android-devices-activated-daily-1-billion-total-devices-on-horizon) comes out at 0.1%.
That's not counting all the android devices which are not registered with google, and these devices are also generally more likely to be infected with malware as users will usually be installing random downloaded junk rather than using the play store.
As always, stats cannot be truly accurate, in either case, but based on the published numbers the 0.1% figure is correct.
There is linux malware and has been for years (ie rootkits, look for lrk or t0rnkit), and there is android malware floating around there these days. Linux has long had sufficient marketshare in several markets which are attractive to hackers (servers, firewalls, appliances, supercomputers etc) and there has never been a shortage of people trying to compromise linux boxes and install malicious code onto them.
The point is that while linux isn't immune from malware, it is considerably less susceptible to it than windows for a number of reasons, both in traditional server deployments and in end user deployments.
The system is designed so that on average amazon profits from it, which means that for the average user it's a bad deal... Even if you are a heavy and impatient shopper, such that the cost of amazon prime outweighs the delivery charges you would have paid otherwise, the fact that you have the service makes you more likely to buy from amazon even if another retailer might be offering a better deal (and also less likely to shop around, so you may not even be aware that another retailer has a better deal).
That "right to profit from it" started as an agreement with the people, media producers receive a short term monopoly in exchange for the content entering the public domain afterwards. This system has now become so distorted by greed on the part of the media producers that it's extremely harmful to society as a whole.
As to the other points:
1) Pure greed, not to mention the fact that lower prices would translate to more sales and potentially more profit overall.
2) Or just contracting to third parties who already have the infrastructure.
3) Have you never considered that obtrusive advertisements offend people and discourage them from making purchases? Quite a lot of people consider "i am sick of seeing adverts for X, so i'm going to try their competitor Y instead", personally i have taken this decision many times.
4) Users already have this power, and are already abusing it. Those who want to do so are already doing so, making it easier for everyone else means nothing as most people won't do anything with it. And to put it another way, if you treat us like criminals then we will act like criminals.
Noone has any "right" to profit... Provide something useful and you can earn profit from it. But many in the content industry are extremely arrogant and greedy, they treat their paying customers with the utmost contempt and expect then to just bend over and take it.
And your talk about "reasonable terms" is extremely arrogant...
What exactly is reasonable about copyright terms that mean anyone who was alive when a work was first published will be dead before it enters the public domain? What is reasonable about regional discrimination? Why should someone be charged twice as much, 6 months later, and actively be prevented from importing their own legally purchased copy from another country? Why should i not be allowed to buy something *AT ALL* because i happen to live in a different country? Even if we're willing to pay the costs of shipping the media here? (and this is even more stupid for online purchases)... What do you have against other countries? What is reasonable about drm schemes, which are aimed at extracting more money from paying customers and do nothing to discourage piracy? What is reasonable about expecting users to pay again to watch the exact same content on a different device?
Copyright started out reasonable, 20 years in the days of mechanical printing presses and distribution by horse drawn carts and sailing ships was a reasonable length of time for content to be published and widely distributed. Today those terms should be much shorter, not longer.
Reasonable is about give and take, your desire to take take take is completely unreasonable. Your demand to punish those who won't put up with unreasonable behavior into submission is exactly what many dictators throughout history have done. Instead of finding a happy medium which keeps citizens content, you treat them like dirt and use the threat of force to keep them in line. Comrade Stalin salutes you.
I can't watch these services on my computer as the proprietary plugins required are not available for my chosen platform (which is perfectly capable of browsing the web and playing standard video files etc)...
I have an internet service which slows down (considerably) during the day and has a limited data allowance during the day, i have unlimited traffic late at night and the network is much less congested... I don't want to watch tv late at night, i want to download the shows late at night and watch them the following day.
I do a lot of travelling, i want to be able to download content onto a portable device and watch it on the train, plane, or in a hotel. Although most hotels provide internet access, the performance varies and is usually fairly poor such that streaming would either not work at all, or be extremely poor quality. Also most streaming services will arbitrarily refuse to work if you leave the country, aka discrimination.
I do subscribe to pay tv, i have the highest tier of service available to me, and yet i still download most of the shows i watch because the service is just better.
What's worse is that we live in a globally interconnected world now, so we are no longer isolated from foreign countries... And yet, many tv shows will be shown much later in some countries. Combine this with the "must see now" attitude that the publishers themselves are promoting and you get a major incentive to download the shows. I don't particularly want to watch shows in 6 months time, after i've read spoilers all over the internet!
Your talking about quantity of usage, and many isps put in place explicit usage caps. And even if they're not up front, there are generally some hidden and unspecified usage caps. So then given that they place a restriction on the quantity of data you can transfer, why should they place an additional restriction on what type of data you can transfer, or what services you can use to do it?
There is an entire world of people who still don't understand that Surface Pro is radically different than RT.
And the reason for that is misleading marketing... MS are so obsessed with the idea of forcing the windows brand everywhere that they are blind to the fact that this brand is poisonous on mobile devices. Windows is not a desirable brand, its something people put up with because they have no other choice in many cases, it's highly detrimental in a market where users realise they do have choice. The only thing it has going for it is compatibility, and yet they dilute the brand with incompatible products, which again turns customers away.
You can run eclipse and the android sdk on a nexus 7, you just need to install a linux chroot because such apps have not been ported natively to android... Ofcourse such apps are not designed for touch input, so they would be painful to use under normal circumstances.
There are open standards for telephony, SIP for instance... You can call someone over SIP like an email address, e.g. user@sip.domain.com etc... The problem is there is no profit in open SIP federation, it's far more profitable to keep users locked in to your own proprietary service (and new ones seem to keep cropping up all the time).
Cheaping out on the firmware is a ridiculous thing to do... They would be better off not bothering with firmware at all, merely ensuring the hardware is compatible with dd-wrt or openwrt and shipping that.
XSRF attacks - i.e. redirecting your browser to issue requests to your internal router... Insecure wifi. Guests. Already infected mobile devices. Small hotels/cafes which provide wifi access using a small router like those described.
Plenty of scope for malicious devices to get into your home network and be used to attack the router.
One of the recommendations is that manufacturers use signed updates... This won't help with issues like those disclosed, and may even make it worse...
The primary reason for including signed updates is to prevent third party firmware from being used, it does nothing to stop the official firmware from having security holes, and it's very unlikely that a hacker is going to completely reflash the device to run a custom firmware rather than backdooring the existing firmware. On the other hand, manufacturers generally only support these devices with official firmware updates for a very short period of time if at all, so third party firmware may be the only way to fix some of these holes.
They said the same about DOS and Wordperfect when i was in highschool, where are they now?
School should teach users generally applicable concepts, ie that there are multiple applications to accomplish a given task. If you only teach specific software then users will be stuck if they encounter different software, and by the time they leave school the software will be different. Even newer versions of the same applications are often wildly different. If taught properly, people will be able to grasp any new application that's designed for performing the same general functions.
While they are theoretically supposed to care about long term returns, in practice most are only concerned with short term returns. What might be beneficial long term can often be detrimental in the short term, which with the current market is likely to get you fired and replaced with someone who will bring in short term gains.
That's irrelevant, what they are selling is bandwidth and there should be no restrictions on how you can use the bandwidth that you've paid for. What they want to do is charge you more because you want to use the same bandwidth for a different purpose.
It's a mix of both... There is a severe shortage of highly skilled people, while relative abundance of poorly skilled people. And as you say, those doing the recruiting are not sufficiently clued up to tell the difference.
The problem is that the IT dept is becoming less IT literate... The industry has expanded very rapidly, and demand for skilled people has massively outpaced demand. This is then coupled with vendors who try to claim their products don't require highly skilled staff to manage them.
Also as you point out, people are becoming more IT literate but this can be dangerous, as these people often think they know a lot more than they really do and are prone to breaking things. These are also the kind of people who try to move into IT and become cheap but barely competent staff.
And a lot of problems aren't down to budget, more competent staff can do more with less resources... It is incompetent staff who will just try to throw money at a problem rather than studying the issue properly.
I long for the days when the IT dept was staffed by geeks who understood the technology and had enough of a keen interest in it to spend their free time learning about new technologies. Now you get an IT dept full of suits who learned what little they know on a few short courses and have no interest in learning anything new.
Using more resources is exactly what happens... As hardware gets faster, software gets slower. While some of the slowness can be attributed to additional features and larger data sets, much of it is down to using higher level languages. Very few people bother writing efficient code anymore, on the basis they can always throw more hardware at it. I have personal experience with a few games that were deemed too slow and rather than try to improve the code, they were simply shelved for a couple of years until the average hardware had caught up.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually XP always supported PAE, PAE is even required to enable the NX bit which XP will use by default on processors which support it.
XP from SP2 onwards has a licensing restriction which causes it to ignore any address space above 4GB, but that is entirely different from not supporting PAE. See http://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/windows/license/memory.htm
And categorise by vendor rather than what the application does, because trying to promote your company brand is more important than letting users easily find the applications they need.
A million infected devices, vs roughly 1 billion android devices activated with google (http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/122459-1-5m-android-devices-activated-daily-1-billion-total-devices-on-horizon) comes out at 0.1%.
That's not counting all the android devices which are not registered with google, and these devices are also generally more likely to be infected with malware as users will usually be installing random downloaded junk rather than using the play store.
As always, stats cannot be truly accurate, in either case, but based on the published numbers the 0.1% figure is correct.
There is linux malware and has been for years (ie rootkits, look for lrk or t0rnkit), and there is android malware floating around there these days. Linux has long had sufficient marketshare in several markets which are attractive to hackers (servers, firewalls, appliances, supercomputers etc) and there has never been a shortage of people trying to compromise linux boxes and install malicious code onto them.
The point is that while linux isn't immune from malware, it is considerably less susceptible to it than windows for a number of reasons, both in traditional server deployments and in end user deployments.
The system is designed so that on average amazon profits from it, which means that for the average user it's a bad deal...
Even if you are a heavy and impatient shopper, such that the cost of amazon prime outweighs the delivery charges you would have paid otherwise, the fact that you have the service makes you more likely to buy from amazon even if another retailer might be offering a better deal (and also less likely to shop around, so you may not even be aware that another retailer has a better deal).
That "right to profit from it" started as an agreement with the people, media producers receive a short term monopoly in exchange for the content entering the public domain afterwards. This system has now become so distorted by greed on the part of the media producers that it's extremely harmful to society as a whole.
As to the other points:
1) Pure greed, not to mention the fact that lower prices would translate to more sales and potentially more profit overall.
2) Or just contracting to third parties who already have the infrastructure.
3) Have you never considered that obtrusive advertisements offend people and discourage them from making purchases? Quite a lot of people consider "i am sick of seeing adverts for X, so i'm going to try their competitor Y instead", personally i have taken this decision many times.
4) Users already have this power, and are already abusing it. Those who want to do so are already doing so, making it easier for everyone else means nothing as most people won't do anything with it. And to put it another way, if you treat us like criminals then we will act like criminals.
Noone has any "right" to profit... Provide something useful and you can earn profit from it. But many in the content industry are extremely arrogant and greedy, they treat their paying customers with the utmost contempt and expect then to just bend over and take it.
And your talk about "reasonable terms" is extremely arrogant...
What exactly is reasonable about copyright terms that mean anyone who was alive when a work was first published will be dead before it enters the public domain?
What is reasonable about regional discrimination? Why should someone be charged twice as much, 6 months later, and actively be prevented from importing their own legally purchased copy from another country?
Why should i not be allowed to buy something *AT ALL* because i happen to live in a different country? Even if we're willing to pay the costs of shipping the media here? (and this is even more stupid for online purchases)... What do you have against other countries?
What is reasonable about drm schemes, which are aimed at extracting more money from paying customers and do nothing to discourage piracy?
What is reasonable about expecting users to pay again to watch the exact same content on a different device?
Copyright started out reasonable, 20 years in the days of mechanical printing presses and distribution by horse drawn carts and sailing ships was a reasonable length of time for content to be published and widely distributed. Today those terms should be much shorter, not longer.
Reasonable is about give and take, your desire to take take take is completely unreasonable.
Your demand to punish those who won't put up with unreasonable behavior into submission is exactly what many dictators throughout history have done. Instead of finding a happy medium which keeps citizens content, you treat them like dirt and use the threat of force to keep them in line. Comrade Stalin salutes you.
I can't watch these services on my computer as the proprietary plugins required are not available for my chosen platform (which is perfectly capable of browsing the web and playing standard video files etc)...
I have an internet service which slows down (considerably) during the day and has a limited data allowance during the day, i have unlimited traffic late at night and the network is much less congested... I don't want to watch tv late at night, i want to download the shows late at night and watch them the following day.
I do a lot of travelling, i want to be able to download content onto a portable device and watch it on the train, plane, or in a hotel. Although most hotels provide internet access, the performance varies and is usually fairly poor such that streaming would either not work at all, or be extremely poor quality. Also most streaming services will arbitrarily refuse to work if you leave the country, aka discrimination.
I do subscribe to pay tv, i have the highest tier of service available to me, and yet i still download most of the shows i watch because the service is just better.
What's worse is that we live in a globally interconnected world now, so we are no longer isolated from foreign countries... And yet, many tv shows will be shown much later in some countries. Combine this with the "must see now" attitude that the publishers themselves are promoting and you get a major incentive to download the shows.
I don't particularly want to watch shows in 6 months time, after i've read spoilers all over the internet!
Your talking about quantity of usage, and many isps put in place explicit usage caps. And even if they're not up front, there are generally some hidden and unspecified usage caps. So then given that they place a restriction on the quantity of data you can transfer, why should they place an additional restriction on what type of data you can transfer, or what services you can use to do it?
There is an entire world of people who still don't understand that Surface Pro is radically different than RT.
And the reason for that is misleading marketing... MS are so obsessed with the idea of forcing the windows brand everywhere that they are blind to the fact that this brand is poisonous on mobile devices. Windows is not a desirable brand, its something people put up with because they have no other choice in many cases, it's highly detrimental in a market where users realise they do have choice.
The only thing it has going for it is compatibility, and yet they dilute the brand with incompatible products, which again turns customers away.
You can run eclipse and the android sdk on a nexus 7, you just need to install a linux chroot because such apps have not been ported natively to android... Ofcourse such apps are not designed for touch input, so they would be painful to use under normal circumstances.
There are open standards for telephony, SIP for instance... You can call someone over SIP like an email address, e.g. user@sip.domain.com etc...
The problem is there is no profit in open SIP federation, it's far more profitable to keep users locked in to your own proprietary service (and new ones seem to keep cropping up all the time).
And some people plug their phones into the router because its a convenient always-on usb port for charging...
Cheaping out on the firmware is a ridiculous thing to do... They would be better off not bothering with firmware at all, merely ensuring the hardware is compatible with dd-wrt or openwrt and shipping that.
XSRF attacks - i.e. redirecting your browser to issue requests to your internal router...
Insecure wifi.
Guests.
Already infected mobile devices.
Small hotels/cafes which provide wifi access using a small router like those described.
Plenty of scope for malicious devices to get into your home network and be used to attack the router.
One of the recommendations is that manufacturers use signed updates... This won't help with issues like those disclosed, and may even make it worse...
The primary reason for including signed updates is to prevent third party firmware from being used, it does nothing to stop the official firmware from having security holes, and it's very unlikely that a hacker is going to completely reflash the device to run a custom firmware rather than backdooring the existing firmware. On the other hand, manufacturers generally only support these devices with official firmware updates for a very short period of time if at all, so third party firmware may be the only way to fix some of these holes.
They said the same about DOS and Wordperfect when i was in highschool, where are they now?
School should teach users generally applicable concepts, ie that there are multiple applications to accomplish a given task. If you only teach specific software then users will be stuck if they encounter different software, and by the time they leave school the software will be different. Even newer versions of the same applications are often wildly different. If taught properly, people will be able to grasp any new application that's designed for performing the same general functions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeuPI_NTdHc
There used to be a site called anuslaptops.com, unfortunately it's now defunct... I believe it was a fake brand, used to bait would be scammers.
While they are theoretically supposed to care about long term returns, in practice most are only concerned with short term returns. What might be beneficial long term can often be detrimental in the short term, which with the current market is likely to get you fired and replaced with someone who will bring in short term gains.
That's irrelevant, what they are selling is bandwidth and there should be no restrictions on how you can use the bandwidth that you've paid for. What they want to do is charge you more because you want to use the same bandwidth for a different purpose.
It's a mix of both...
There is a severe shortage of highly skilled people, while relative abundance of poorly skilled people. And as you say, those doing the recruiting are not sufficiently clued up to tell the difference.
The problem is that the IT dept is becoming less IT literate...
The industry has expanded very rapidly, and demand for skilled people has massively outpaced demand. This is then coupled with vendors who try to claim their products don't require highly skilled staff to manage them.
Also as you point out, people are becoming more IT literate but this can be dangerous, as these people often think they know a lot more than they really do and are prone to breaking things. These are also the kind of people who try to move into IT and become cheap but barely competent staff.
And a lot of problems aren't down to budget, more competent staff can do more with less resources... It is incompetent staff who will just try to throw money at a problem rather than studying the issue properly.
I long for the days when the IT dept was staffed by geeks who understood the technology and had enough of a keen interest in it to spend their free time learning about new technologies. Now you get an IT dept full of suits who learned what little they know on a few short courses and have no interest in learning anything new.
Using more resources is exactly what happens... As hardware gets faster, software gets slower. While some of the slowness can be attributed to additional features and larger data sets, much of it is down to using higher level languages. Very few people bother writing efficient code anymore, on the basis they can always throw more hardware at it.
I have personal experience with a few games that were deemed too slow and rather than try to improve the code, they were simply shelved for a couple of years until the average hardware had caught up.
Every car does have a cheap option for GPS, it's called aftermarket units like tomtom etc, or even just a stand for your phone these days.
The problem with many built in gps systems is that auto makers soon stop updating them...