Butt ugly interface, poor user interface design. Microsoft, you ain't no Apple.
I don't want Zoloft-inspired colors, and yet more areas to shove UI controls and informational boxes. At this rate, I'll probably buy another Mac the next time I upgrade my home computer(s).
This isn't news, the NetScan project at Microsoft Research has been around for years.
Slashdot even had a previous story about this project, but I can't be bothered to look things up every time someone at Slashdot hits the FUD Panic button.
Actually, I've been in the situation and the answer is "Yes". Now that the Mac is at home and the big, complex network is at work, when I come home I want nothing to do with dicking with anything after a day's work.
Do something active at least 30 minutes a day during the OTHER 14 hours of your day. Even just walking would be good. Bike to work, avoid elevators and other lazy people devices.
The NT kernel WAS portable. It has been said by MS kernel engineers that with Windows 2000, the changes made to the kernel made it very non-portable. While I doubt this is actually as drastic as it sounds, I reckon a port to the 970 is nowhere near "trivial".
Hey, since we're all throwing intellectual property rights to the wind by trying to deceive the RIAA, how can I apply FreeNet to misusing GPL'd software for my own benefit?
I'm sure none of you would have a problem with that, because you're not all about double standards, right?
If you are teaching "Office Applications That You Will Find In The Workplace", then teaching MS Office should be a major part of such a subject.
Hardly any schools have such a class, but they don't need to. MS Office familiarization should be a part of other classes, they are tools, not subjects.
This does not mean that Linux based systems should be completely excluded. The article mentioned that some started using Linux for servers as early as 1995. This quiet success did not victimize the schools because of OS Holy Wars (tm).
I agree, but this is not the aim of K12Linux. Their aim is to get Linux in the classroom, which I think is a huge educational/Total Cost of Ownership mistake.
People have Windows PCs at home, and they still can only barely navigate their environments, now you want to throw an alien environment, such as KDE at them and have to support that? No thanks.
In grade school, learning MS Office might not be so important. Learning concepts might be much more important. If you are in grades 1-6 just how much do you think technology might change by the time these kids graduate high school? How much has technology changed in the last 10 years? 5 years?
Again, I agree. But two points, again, K12Linux is aimed at kids, this is the topic at hand, and how much more conductive to learning do you think Linux is, over Windows? If you say "more", I've gotta call bullshit on that.
If Gartner says...
I don't listen to what Gartner says, but I agree that there has to be some solid manner of forecasting technology and planning accordingly.
If you are building a specialized system, such as a "Grant Tracking System", then does it victimize schools to use Linux instead of MS? (Yes, I know that in MS's view it does.)
Again,t he focus of this project is Linux in education. I'm not anti-Linux, I think it has it's place. But I think that that place is not best in the classroom.
By familiarizing students with niche apps running on a niche operating system, preparing them for a niche job.
Personally, I'd rather see more expensive Windows boxes in there with Microsoft Office installed.
Schools shouldn't be the victims of OS holy wars, they're preparation for real life and real jobs. The real world uses MS Office and its capabilities. The right way requires the right tools.
Hell, let's put em on refurbished VIC-20's, we'll save even more money!
Seriously, the submitter needs a life... a REAL life where big worries don't involved having your magic skills docked 3 levels whilst you're trapped in an undersea with a level 4 dwarf from Dayton.
Learn things like C and TCP/IP inside and out. Play with stuff for a long while. After you feel comfortable in your areas of interest, examine the source code of exploits and security tools. Read every quality whitepaper you can find. Keep abreast of the latest security "news", which currently seems to be the now-mediocre SecurityFocus and Bugtraq.
In underground circles long before ESR started his revisionist campaign, "crackers" referred to people who cracked software copy protection schemes.
Hackers were "security breakers" as you say. This is why we have 2600: The Hacker's Quarterly, and terms such as HPAV (Hacking, Phreaking, Anarchy, Virus). History lends a much different picture than the one OSI folks are trying to push on us.
The term "cracker" was pushed in the recent past by the OSI movement in their efforts to distinguish "kernel hackers" from "system hackers". But long before this misinformation arose, it was "hacker".
Unfortunately, due to an aggressive revisionist campaign by ESR, Slashdot, and others, they want you to use their term and have wrongly confused a lot of people (like you).
You are an idiot, I cannot believe this is moderated +5 "Informative".
Wasn't it just a few years ago that Steve Gibson of Gibson Research discovered that Microsoft's TCP stack was identical to BSD?
Others have covered the illegitimacy of Gibson enough that I don't need to add more. Microsoft has acknowledged using BSD code in Windows 2000 many times. It's "TCP/IP" stack, TCP is a layer 4 protocol.
but in the console it actually shows the c: drive on my one computer as/dev/hda1 or something similar to what I would see in Linux.
it wasn't/dev/hda1, it was the kernel's name for your drive. The NT kernel doesn't give a flip about drive letters, it uses its own namespace.
Also, Windows even has an/etc directory, even though it is buried down a few levels. This is where they have the hosts file.
Actually, it's a C:\WINNT\System32\Drivers\Etc folder. Having a folder named "etc" does not mean they ripped off UNIX, but this statement (as your others) are so completely unclued that this does not need to be said.
I would be willing to bet there is quite a bit of Unix code in Windows.
Duh. That's what BSD is about.
How else could you explain the gradual increased steadiness over the past 5 years.
Gee, perhaps because Microsoft employs many of the most brilliant computer scientists out there, Dave Cutler in the Kernel team, who was involved with the uberstable VMS operating system (which spanked UNIX on uptimes and was about as far from UNIX as you could get).
Microsoft did work on Xenix years ago, and for that they did work on OS/2 with IBM which has a lot of BSD in it as well.
Great! This is what the BSD license is about.
If the gov't ever opened up their source a lot of you guys would probably recognize major pieces:)
Duh. A guy from Microsoft spoke in a recent interview about using BSD networking code in NT.
Slashdot Mirror
Butt ugly interface, poor user interface design. Microsoft, you ain't no Apple.
I don't want Zoloft-inspired colors, and yet more areas to shove UI controls and informational boxes. At this rate, I'll probably buy another Mac the next time I upgrade my home computer(s).
This isn't news, the NetScan project at Microsoft Research has been around for years.
Slashdot even had a previous story about this project, but I can't be bothered to look things up every time someone at Slashdot hits the FUD Panic button.
It's "you're" not "your".
Perhaps it should take after the stellar usability example set by Linux, KDE and GNOME (Both of whom borrow from Windows UI concepts heavily)?
Heh, no thanks.
Actually, I've been in the situation and the answer is "Yes". Now that the Mac is at home and the big, complex network is at work, when I come home I want nothing to do with dicking with anything after a day's work.
Doesn't this story belong on The Onion, instead?
Do something active at least 30 minutes a day during the OTHER 14 hours of your day. Even just walking would be good. Bike to work, avoid elevators and other lazy people devices.
The NT kernel WAS portable. It has been said by MS kernel engineers that with Windows 2000, the changes made to the kernel made it very non-portable. While I doubt this is actually as drastic as it sounds, I reckon a port to the 970 is nowhere near "trivial".
blahblah privacy blahblah outrage blahblah big brother blahblah i copyrighted my location, this is a violation of my IP rights blahblah DMCA.
Oh, it's the Woz? Ok.
Did you even bother reading the story? It specifically mentions the RIAA's witch hunt, implying that FreeNet may be the way to go to avoid it.
No, THANK YOU for playing, ass clown.
Hey, since we're all throwing intellectual property rights to the wind by trying to deceive the RIAA, how can I apply FreeNet to misusing GPL'd software for my own benefit?
I'm sure none of you would have a problem with that, because you're not all about double standards, right?
If you are teaching "Office Applications That You Will Find In The Workplace", then teaching MS Office should be a major part of such a subject.
Hardly any schools have such a class, but they don't need to. MS Office familiarization should be a part of other classes, they are tools, not subjects.
This does not mean that Linux based systems should be completely excluded. The article mentioned that some started using Linux for servers as early as 1995. This quiet success did not victimize the schools because of OS Holy Wars (tm).
I agree, but this is not the aim of K12Linux. Their aim is to get Linux in the classroom, which I think is a huge educational/Total Cost of Ownership mistake.
People have Windows PCs at home, and they still can only barely navigate their environments, now you want to throw an alien environment, such as KDE at them and have to support that? No thanks.
In grade school, learning MS Office might not be so important. Learning concepts might be much more important. If you are in grades 1-6 just how much do you think technology might change by the time these kids graduate high school? How much has technology changed in the last 10 years? 5 years?
Again, I agree. But two points, again, K12Linux is aimed at kids, this is the topic at hand, and how much more conductive to learning do you think Linux is, over Windows? If you say "more", I've gotta call bullshit on that.
If Gartner says...
I don't listen to what Gartner says, but I agree that there has to be some solid manner of forecasting technology and planning accordingly.
If you are building a specialized system, such as a "Grant Tracking System", then does it victimize schools to use Linux instead of MS? (Yes, I know that in MS's view it does.)
Again,t he focus of this project is Linux in education. I'm not anti-Linux, I think it has it's place. But I think that that place is not best in the classroom.
By familiarizing students with niche apps running on a niche operating system, preparing them for a niche job.
Personally, I'd rather see more expensive Windows boxes in there with Microsoft Office installed.
Schools shouldn't be the victims of OS holy wars, they're preparation for real life and real jobs. The real world uses MS Office and its capabilities. The right way requires the right tools.
Hell, let's put em on refurbished VIC-20's, we'll save even more money!
How utterly gay and boring...
How do we make stories from michael not show up? I can't seem to figure it out, and I'm sick of reading his trolling.
But does it have an ice cube's chance in Hell of overtaking the Mac on the desktop? No.
When will the Amiga surpass Mac OS X?
This story is almost flamebait, and heavy on the ridiculous.
Seriously, the submitter needs a life... a REAL life where big worries don't involved having your magic skills docked 3 levels whilst you're trapped in an undersea with a level 4 dwarf from Dayton.
Learn things like C and TCP/IP inside and out. Play with stuff for a long while. After you feel comfortable in your areas of interest, examine the source code of exploits and security tools. Read every quality whitepaper you can find. Keep abreast of the latest security "news", which currently seems to be the now-mediocre SecurityFocus and Bugtraq.
Until then, you aren't a good security player.
See above.
In underground circles long before ESR started his revisionist campaign, "crackers" referred to people who cracked software copy protection schemes.
Hackers were "security breakers" as you say. This is why we have 2600: The Hacker's Quarterly, and terms such as HPAV (Hacking, Phreaking, Anarchy, Virus). History lends a much different picture than the one OSI folks are trying to push on us.
Actually, you're wrong.
The term "cracker" was pushed in the recent past by the OSI movement in their efforts to distinguish "kernel hackers" from "system hackers". But long before this misinformation arose, it was "hacker".
Unfortunately, due to an aggressive revisionist campaign by ESR, Slashdot, and others, they want you to use their term and have wrongly confused a lot of people (like you).
You are an idiot, I cannot believe this is moderated +5 "Informative".
/dev/hda1 or something similar to what I would see in Linux.
/dev/hda1, it was the kernel's name for your drive. The NT kernel doesn't give a flip about drive letters, it uses its own namespace.
/etc directory, even though it is buried down a few levels. This is where they have the hosts file.
:)
Wasn't it just a few years ago that Steve Gibson of Gibson Research discovered that Microsoft's TCP stack was identical to BSD?
Others have covered the illegitimacy of Gibson enough that I don't need to add more. Microsoft has acknowledged using BSD code in Windows 2000 many times. It's "TCP/IP" stack, TCP is a layer 4 protocol.
but in the console it actually shows the c: drive on my one computer as
it wasn't
Also, Windows even has an
Actually, it's a C:\WINNT\System32\Drivers\Etc folder. Having a folder named "etc" does not mean they ripped off UNIX, but this statement (as your others) are so completely unclued that this does not need to be said.
I would be willing to bet there is quite a bit of Unix code in Windows.
Duh. That's what BSD is about.
How else could you explain the gradual increased steadiness over the past 5 years.
Gee, perhaps because Microsoft employs many of the most brilliant computer scientists out there, Dave Cutler in the Kernel team, who was involved with the uberstable VMS operating system (which spanked UNIX on uptimes and was about as far from UNIX as you could get).
Microsoft did work on Xenix years ago, and for that they did work on OS/2 with IBM which has a lot of BSD in it as well.
Great! This is what the BSD license is about.
If the gov't ever opened up their source a lot of you guys would probably recognize major pieces
Duh. A guy from Microsoft spoke in a recent interview about using BSD networking code in NT.
Too bad we can't mark stories as flamebait/trolling. This would be a prime example. Bye bye michael-submitted stories.
Guess that means I won't have to pack any toilet paper, I can just use the Gnomedex itinerary sheet.
CLR produces slow code.
Where did you pull this out of your ass, idiot? You're the reason Slashdot sucks. Die.