So when this app store goes live, this will probably happen:
Â
1. The app store will randomly break from a Windows update for no apparent reason and suddenly when you try to buy apps, it'll start downloading and then you'll get "Unknown error 0x8004008 has occurred" with a "more info" hyperlink that leads to a 404 page on Microsoft's site. Running a repair or system restore will not fix it, and system file checker will tell you nothing is wrong. You'll then reinstall Windows.
Â
2. Once you reinstall Windows, you'll be able to download apps from the Windows App Store, but once the app is downloaded, it will launch the third party software vendor's own custom installation program which will stick junk all over your hard disk, trigger UAC prompts, and when you launch the app, another random app on your machine will try to repair itself.
Â
3. When you try and uninstall the app, you won't be able to do it from the app store, you'll have to go to "Programs and Features" and uninstall it from there, where you will get an error saying that the install log could not be found and you're unable to uninstall the app.
Get a dictionary.
security
â"noun
1.freedom from danger, risk, etc.; safety.
2.freedom from care, anxiety, or doubt; well-founded confidence.
3.something that secures or makes safe; protection; defense.
4.freedom from financial cares or from want: The insurance policy gave the family security.
5.precautions taken to guard against crime, attack, sabotage, espionage, etc.: The senator claimed security was lax and potential enemies know our plans.
Keeping crooks out of things is way down at definition number 5.
"Does anyone have a good plan or sources of reliable information that can be used to inform the customer?"
If you don't personally know of any reliable source of information that can be used to inform customers that the software is secure, why are you making the claim?
Back in the '80s and early '90s, computer geeks coped perfectly well with competing computers and operating systems. Sure, an Amiga was a bit different from an Atari, which was different from PCs, Macs, and Commodores, etc., but so what? People just coped because they were computer geeks and they loved this sort of thing.
What the Windows and Mac culture has done over the past 20 years, is refine the computing experience to such a degree that you no longer need to be a computer geek in order to do things like print a resume, manage your budget, watch movies, create movies, run a radio station, design buildings and roads, and kill Orcs on a Sunday night.
"Instead of learning about launching applications and using word processors, they're trained to click on [buttons]"
Tell me, what else is there to launching applications and using them that you believe an end-user, who doesn't care about the inner workings of the device, needs to know?
Your comment advocates the position that computers should be difficult to use. That in order to use them, people should be required to know how they're assembled and configured in the factory.
Ya know, instead of people learning about the electromagnetic spectrum, they're simply "trained" to press buttons on a microwave oven.
The 80s are over man. Computers aren't just used by computer geeks anymore, and those people that aren't computer geeks, they don't really care, and they're never going to care for the exact same reason that I don't care how my washer/dryer is assembled.
I guess I'm just "trained" to dial that timer and press the button that says "delicate fabric" and click start.
Ya know, I have a right to purchase a car without an engine.
The fact that I have to do extra work to get one is my problem, not Chevy's. It's not Chevy's fault that ten of their customers want a car without an engine and the other 30 million want cars with engines.
If you can't find a computer vendor that sells computers without an operating system, and you feel that there is enough demand that they would make money doing so, then perhaps this is an opportunity for you to make some cash selling high quality machines without an operating system.
Or you can get laws passed and court decisions handed down that tell companies what products they're allowed to sell.
I know which option I think is better.
There's nothing stopping schools and third-world countries from using Windows considering Microsoft practically gives the operating system to them for free. Besides, can't the vaunted WINE run it?
Just curious as to what country you live in and who your software vendors are, because last I checked, there was no such thing as a "site license" for Windows.
Unfortunately these office suite scripts are often used for things like disk access to import data.
And that, of course, is almost directly related to the fact that the MS file formats are closed. With an open format like ODF, scripts for importing data aren't critical, since it's quite easy instead for a program to export it in the proper format, or to write an external script or program to transform data into ODF format. After all, it's XML.
----
So you're saying XML based ODF format files are not stored on disk, right?
Who are you to say that Ubuntu is aimed "too much" at the home user? Did you ever think that maybe that's who they're targeting? Every other Linux distribution isn't aimed at all at any variation of a home/average user. The folks at Ubuntu are probably going "gee, duh. Maybe we should make a distribution that you can use without having to have 6 years of sysadmin experience"
You're doing the right thing by using a distribution you prefer. It's just a little off base to say that Ubuntu's distribution is aimed "too much" toward home users. Or do you prefer the days when you had to be a computer geek in order to use a computer?
"If you'd bothered to RTFA (which I did a month or so ago) you would notice that the secondary server will only accept mail which was first rejected by the primary"
That's not correct. An email message does not have to be first rejected by a higher priority MX in order to be accepted by a lower priority MX. MTAs are unaware of where they fall in the priority list of MX records for a domain. SMTP MTAs which are lower priority always accept email, whether it was rejected by a higher priority MX or not. The lower priority MX servers have no idea what attempts were made to deliver prior to them receiving it. Your statement ignores the existence of direct to secondary MX spam.
"If the MPAA is knowingly uploading something to you then they are giving their OK to you to accept it."
That's right. They're give you their OK for you to accept the FAKE torrent.
"The MPAA is in full control of the content or fake content. If the MPAA has agreements with record labels not to give anything away for free then that is the MPAA's problem."
They aren't giving away any record label or movie content for free. They are giving away fake torrents for free.
I have to agree on the "plot device" bit.
Particularly with how Dax was killed by evil ghosts while on a quest to save the Orb of Prophecy so The Emissary could perform the Rite of X and seal the Portal of Y.
They ran out of real story so they tried to stitch in a DnD plot line and they ended up with the standard fantasy cardboard characters.
Paul Thurott BUYS A COPY OF WINDOWS LEGITIMATELY, then finds out later on that the ONLINE RETAILER sold him a pirated copy.
Yet he says that HE made a mistake? Sure, it's not Microsoft's fault, it's the online retailer's fault. It's not Thurott's fault.. yet he sits there and tells everyone that HE made the mistake.
What an ass kiss.
Personally, you would be stealing the work of those who wrote the GPled software, by taking away the same freedoms that you enjoyed to build the router.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that locking the hardware I manufacture to only run a certain binary somehow removes your right to modify GPL'd code. It does not. No one is forcing you to buy my router, and I'm certainly not obligated to help you change the functioning of hardware that I manufacturer. I don't think you should be locked up or arrested for trying to modify the hardware -- it is yours after you buy it.. but it's still not my problem nor my responsibility to help you. It is, however, my job to make sure the hardware I manufacture functions consistantly when it's sold at the store or after you sell it on Ebay because you might fuck it up, sell it, and when someone gets a router that doesn't work with my company's name on it, they say my product sucks.
The GPLd code is still GPLd regardless of what my hardware does. Nothing prevents you from modifying the software and running it on any other hardware.
If you got a problem with the way I manufacture the [i]hardware[/i], buy someone else's. I don't care, because I have billions of non-dorks who are still going to buy my product who also don't care.
I'm not stealing shit, because the GPLv2'd software I use says I'm not stealing shit. You're missing the point. If the Linux kernel license was updated to version 3 of the GPL, I'm not going to use it for the same reasons other hardware manufacturers would not use it. There goes Linux on embedded devices. Torvalds knows this.
Your comment basically accuses me of violating GPLv3 by choosing to use GPLv2 software on my hardware under GPLv2 guidelines. This is bullshit logic.
This is about ensuring that people can't change software, so that DRM restrictions can be enforced. That's what DRM is all about -- locking data so that it can only be accessed by certain approved applications (code with the correct digital signature). It also has the added effect (or benefit if you happen to be a thieving manufacturer desperate to do an end run around the GPL), of turning formerly Free software into proprietary binaries.
WRONG. This is about hardware manufacturers making sure their hardware runs the way it was manufactured and tested before it was sold to consumers who pay money that the company relies upon. NO ONE is stopping you or anyone else from selling hardware without such proprietary locks. Don't bitch, compete.
Personally, if I developed a linux based router and wanted to sell it, I sure as hell am going to make sure it's locked to only run the build that I tested and validated. I care about having customers who pay for a reliable product a lot more than I care about a bunch of dorks who want to play with my hardware.
Don't like the software on the router I manufacture? Build your own router and shut up. That's not my problem.
Yes, but currently Free Software authors are subsidising the development of platforms that takes their Free code and locks it up so that it can't be modified or replaced.
Wrong. Embedded device manufacturers aren't "locking up" open source software. They're locking the hardware they spent money to manufacture. If I build a router and embed a version of Linux on it and hardcode my router to only run the copy of Linux that I supplied, that does not prevent you from modifying any code. It prevents you from modifying the operation of the hardware I built.
this would be a good time to download the latest version of essential Windows tools like Process Explorer before they can go mysteriously missing or be locked up behind the wall of Windows Genuine Advantage."
Or, you can actually buy a legitimate license for Windows and not worry about "Windows Genuine Advantage."
95% of your software no longer works (yes there are free alternatives to most things, but you already paid for a lot of expensive software so why can't you use it?) * You can no longer play your favorite multiplayer game with your friends from university.
Yeah, it's Microsoft's fault Adobe hasn't released Photoshop for Linux.
You can't access the files on your hard disk from another oprating system because Windows encrypted it.
You're complaining because you can't read an encrypted hard drive on another computer? You do understand why people encrypt things, right? Besides, this feature is optional. If you want to read your disk in another operating system, I strongly suggest you don't enable the optional encryption included with Windows Vista. This is simple common sense. But I know you want to feel cool for bashing Microsoft on Slashdot, so that's okay.
Do you really think they care about feedback? They will just shove it down Windows user's throats anyway. the average person doesnt really have a choice.
Of course they care about feedback. They just don't care about feedback from a bunch of nerds on Slashdot who have absolutely no intention of buying any of their software anyway. They do, however, care about the feedback from their paying customers, which is why all of their products have the features they have; and anyone who thinks all of the features that are in their products are unnecessary, like say the stuff in Office, is still living with their mom and has never had a job.
Slashdot Mirror
 1. The app store will randomly break from a Windows update for no apparent reason and suddenly when you try to buy apps, it'll start downloading and then you'll get "Unknown error 0x8004008 has occurred" with a "more info" hyperlink that leads to a 404 page on Microsoft's site. Running a repair or system restore will not fix it, and system file checker will tell you nothing is wrong. You'll then reinstall Windows.
 2. Once you reinstall Windows, you'll be able to download apps from the Windows App Store, but once the app is downloaded, it will launch the third party software vendor's own custom installation program which will stick junk all over your hard disk, trigger UAC prompts, and when you launch the app, another random app on your machine will try to repair itself.
 3. When you try and uninstall the app, you won't be able to do it from the app store, you'll have to go to "Programs and Features" and uninstall it from there, where you will get an error saying that the install log could not be found and you're unable to uninstall the app.
 I dare you to tell me I'm wrong.
Get a dictionary. security â"noun 1.freedom from danger, risk, etc.; safety. 2.freedom from care, anxiety, or doubt; well-founded confidence. 3.something that secures or makes safe; protection; defense. 4.freedom from financial cares or from want: The insurance policy gave the family security. 5.precautions taken to guard against crime, attack, sabotage, espionage, etc.: The senator claimed security was lax and potential enemies know our plans. Keeping crooks out of things is way down at definition number 5.
Step 1: Claim that Firefox and Chrome are destroying Internet Explorer in market share, celebrate record downloads of Firefox.
Step 2: Claim that Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer somehow makes everyone too stupid to know that other browsers exist.
Step 3: Somehow believe these two claims don't conflict with each other.
Dear Anti-Microsoft crowd, Please pick one or the other.
"Does anyone have a good plan or sources of reliable information that can be used to inform the customer?"
If you don't personally know of any reliable source of information that can be used to inform customers that the software is secure, why are you making the claim?
Back in the '80s and early '90s, computer geeks coped perfectly well with competing computers and operating systems. Sure, an Amiga was a bit different from an Atari, which was different from PCs, Macs, and Commodores, etc., but so what? People just coped because they were computer geeks and they loved this sort of thing.
What the Windows and Mac culture has done over the past 20 years, is refine the computing experience to such a degree that you no longer need to be a computer geek in order to do things like print a resume, manage your budget, watch movies, create movies, run a radio station, design buildings and roads, and kill Orcs on a Sunday night.
"Instead of learning about launching applications and using word processors, they're trained to click on [buttons]"
Tell me, what else is there to launching applications and using them that you believe an end-user, who doesn't care about the inner workings of the device, needs to know?
Your comment advocates the position that computers should be difficult to use. That in order to use them, people should be required to know how they're assembled and configured in the factory.
Ya know, instead of people learning about the electromagnetic spectrum, they're simply "trained" to press buttons on a microwave oven.
The 80s are over man. Computers aren't just used by computer geeks anymore, and those people that aren't computer geeks, they don't really care, and they're never going to care for the exact same reason that I don't care how my washer/dryer is assembled.
I guess I'm just "trained" to dial that timer and press the button that says "delicate fabric" and click start.
What a dumbass I am.
If Windows had a centralized software repository, they'd get sued by someone.
Ya know, I have a right to purchase a car without an engine. The fact that I have to do extra work to get one is my problem, not Chevy's. It's not Chevy's fault that ten of their customers want a car without an engine and the other 30 million want cars with engines. If you can't find a computer vendor that sells computers without an operating system, and you feel that there is enough demand that they would make money doing so, then perhaps this is an opportunity for you to make some cash selling high quality machines without an operating system. Or you can get laws passed and court decisions handed down that tell companies what products they're allowed to sell. I know which option I think is better.
There's an easy way to buy a computer that doesn't have Windows preinstalled on it. Don't buy one that has Windows preinstalled on it.
There's nothing stopping schools and third-world countries from using Windows considering Microsoft practically gives the operating system to them for free. Besides, can't the vaunted WINE run it?
Why? Because you also are too stupid to dereference your objects so a GC can clean them out?
Just curious as to what country you live in and who your software vendors are, because last I checked, there was no such thing as a "site license" for Windows.
Who are you to say that Ubuntu is aimed "too much" at the home user? Did you ever think that maybe that's who they're targeting? Every other Linux distribution isn't aimed at all at any variation of a home/average user. The folks at Ubuntu are probably going "gee, duh. Maybe we should make a distribution that you can use without having to have 6 years of sysadmin experience" You're doing the right thing by using a distribution you prefer. It's just a little off base to say that Ubuntu's distribution is aimed "too much" toward home users. Or do you prefer the days when you had to be a computer geek in order to use a computer?
"Forced to use Windows"
Grow up.
That's not correct. An email message does not have to be first rejected by a higher priority MX in order to be accepted by a lower priority MX. MTAs are unaware of where they fall in the priority list of MX records for a domain. SMTP MTAs which are lower priority always accept email, whether it was rejected by a higher priority MX or not. The lower priority MX servers have no idea what attempts were made to deliver prior to them receiving it. Your statement ignores the existence of direct to secondary MX spam.
"If the MPAA is knowingly uploading something to you then they are giving their OK to you to accept it." That's right. They're give you their OK for you to accept the FAKE torrent. "The MPAA is in full control of the content or fake content. If the MPAA has agreements with record labels not to give anything away for free then that is the MPAA's problem." They aren't giving away any record label or movie content for free. They are giving away fake torrents for free.
Did you even watch DS9?
Paul Thurott BUYS A COPY OF WINDOWS LEGITIMATELY, then finds out later on that the ONLINE RETAILER sold him a pirated copy. Yet he says that HE made a mistake? Sure, it's not Microsoft's fault, it's the online retailer's fault. It's not Thurott's fault .. yet he sits there and tells everyone that HE made the mistake.
What an ass kiss.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that locking the hardware I manufacture to only run a certain binary somehow removes your right to modify GPL'd code. It does not. No one is forcing you to buy my router, and I'm certainly not obligated to help you change the functioning of hardware that I manufacturer. I don't think you should be locked up or arrested for trying to modify the hardware -- it is yours after you buy it .. but it's still not my problem nor my responsibility to help you. It is, however, my job to make sure the hardware I manufacture functions consistantly when it's sold at the store or after you sell it on Ebay because you might fuck it up, sell it, and when someone gets a router that doesn't work with my company's name on it, they say my product sucks.
The GPLd code is still GPLd regardless of what my hardware does. Nothing prevents you from modifying the software and running it on any other hardware.
If you got a problem with the way I manufacture the [i]hardware[/i], buy someone else's. I don't care, because I have billions of non-dorks who are still going to buy my product who also don't care.
I'm not stealing shit, because the GPLv2'd software I use says I'm not stealing shit. You're missing the point. If the Linux kernel license was updated to version 3 of the GPL, I'm not going to use it for the same reasons other hardware manufacturers would not use it. There goes Linux on embedded devices. Torvalds knows this.
Your comment basically accuses me of violating GPLv3 by choosing to use GPLv2 software on my hardware under GPLv2 guidelines. This is bullshit logic.
WRONG. This is about hardware manufacturers making sure their hardware runs the way it was manufactured and tested before it was sold to consumers who pay money that the company relies upon. NO ONE is stopping you or anyone else from selling hardware without such proprietary locks. Don't bitch, compete. Personally, if I developed a linux based router and wanted to sell it, I sure as hell am going to make sure it's locked to only run the build that I tested and validated. I care about having customers who pay for a reliable product a lot more than I care about a bunch of dorks who want to play with my hardware. Don't like the software on the router I manufacture? Build your own router and shut up. That's not my problem.
Wrong. Embedded device manufacturers aren't "locking up" open source software. They're locking the hardware they spent money to manufacture. If I build a router and embed a version of Linux on it and hardcode my router to only run the copy of Linux that I supplied, that does not prevent you from modifying any code. It prevents you from modifying the operation of the hardware I built.
You're right. They have a monopoly. No one runs Linux, BSD, or Mac OS.
this would be a good time to download the latest version of essential Windows tools like Process Explorer before they can go mysteriously missing or be locked up behind the wall of Windows Genuine Advantage."
Or, you can actually buy a legitimate license for Windows and not worry about "Windows Genuine Advantage."
95% of your software no longer works (yes there are free alternatives to most things, but you already paid for a lot of expensive software so why can't you use it?)
* You can no longer play your favorite multiplayer game with your friends from university.
Yeah, it's Microsoft's fault Adobe hasn't released Photoshop for Linux.
You can't access the files on your hard disk from another oprating system because Windows encrypted it.
You're complaining because you can't read an encrypted hard drive on another computer? You do understand why people encrypt things, right? Besides, this feature is optional. If you want to read your disk in another operating system, I strongly suggest you don't enable the optional encryption included with Windows Vista. This is simple common sense. But I know you want to feel cool for bashing Microsoft on Slashdot, so that's okay.
Do you really think they care about feedback? They will just shove it down Windows user's throats anyway. the average person doesnt really have a choice.
Of course they care about feedback. They just don't care about feedback from a bunch of nerds on Slashdot who have absolutely no intention of buying any of their software anyway. They do, however, care about the feedback from their paying customers, which is why all of their products have the features they have; and anyone who thinks all of the features that are in their products are unnecessary, like say the stuff in Office, is still living with their mom and has never had a job.