Why "upgrade"? Amazing. Windows 2000 might be better than Vista. If there ever was a damning critique of non free software, this one is the best. Why on Earth would anyone cling to mid 90's software when they could have the latest and greatest on the same hardware with any GNU/Linux distribution?
paytard@winblowz> sudo apt-get install MSOffice
...[long list of.EXE barf]...
Need to get 36.77GB of archives and give us $499 with 9.99/month service fee.
After this operation, 62.87GB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]?
Yeah, it would be an improvement but the dependencies would still suck life. Xandros has gone down that road with honest intentions. It's simply impossible to weld non free software together when one player throws a money wrench.
The news is that SP1 is a disaster that's slated to auto install itself. Thankfully, most people have avoided Vista and SP1 will seal the deal. People who have been patient enough to have used Vista for more than two days are going to give up M$ forever if SP1 screws their computer.
As for the slow news day sneer, put up or shut up. You write enough to complain about posting limits. Why don't you submit some more worthy news? Vista stories bore me too but not as much as the Opera stories that fill your journal.
but ActiveX will never be secure. I noticed this a week ago but did not think it worth mentioning. No one really believes IE will really be standards compliant or secure, do they?
It's nice of them to try, but you have to question the utility and sanity of such a massive NIH effort as IE is. At this point, an honest company would throw in the towel and call IE a file browser then try to catch up to Konqueror in that regard. M$ has gone it's own way so long that the quickest route for them to a standards compliant browser is to download Firefox.
This is only a trap for people who push OK without reading things. It's not Apple's fault that Windoze bombards users with so much crap that it's next to impossible for people to be careful. If you look at screen shots of the installer, you will see that everything is well explained and it's easy to opt out of the offer. Don't compare this to malware installers which don't ask or M$ which give you no choice in the matter. "IE8 or no more updates" is not happening here.
Like the department statement of the article implied, a malicious person could plant these links on other sites, like Slashdot, where people have a habit of posting malicious links. Instead of looking at someone's ass, you will get a raid. It's like one click swatting - either very stupid or very malicious of the FBI. Because this is such an obvious issue, I'm betting on malice.
Like the department statement of the article implied, a malicious person could plant these links on other sites, like Slashdot, where people have a habit of posting malicious links. Instead of looking at someone's ass, you will get a raid. It's like one click swatting - either very stupid or very malicious of the FBI. Because this is such an obvious issue, I'm betting on malice.
Day and night? The only thing that can reconcile government's desire to use P2P efficiency and their censorship goals is filtered networks. Day and night may not be so far from each other.
It's not that Mac OS X is inherently more secure against viruses than current versions of Windows (although it was clearly more secure than Windows prior to XP SP2);
What, did I miss privilege separation being introduced to Windows or does the above make as much sense as the popularity myth he tries to push? Properly designed multiuser OS ARE more secure than any version of Windows ever will be.
Twitter writes every post you don't like. He's in your computer, behind every bush and controlling half your cats by Jedi mind control. Do exactly what they say because Microsoft pays him to talk to you.
What do you think the marginal cost of a copy of Word is? If its $5, I'd be shocked.
The marginal cost to M$ is next to zero, the cost of the electricity required to make the copy. It would be a rip off for half that price because it costs you your liberty.
It was dumping Just the same. When there's a market of fixed size and your competitor needs to sell their product at D to make it's operating cost and you offer your competing product at anything from D- to zero, you have dumped your product. If you are able to do this because of some monopoly in another product, you have used something called monopoly rent and you have subsidized the destruction of your competitor. Then, when your competitor is out of business, you raise the price of your competing product to $400, the purpose of your dumping has been revealed.
There's more than dumping that happened here. M$ engaged in OS level anti-competitive practices unique to software, FUD unique to M$ and selective marketing/bribery that's all too common. It will be interesting to see exactly what kind of filth this new trial will prove.
I don't like the blame the user excuse, but that is what is being reported. If you scroll down to the Attack method, you see "Attack against the administrator/user (password stealing/sniffing)" is the overwhelming favorite.
This almost makes sense, but I don't trust the site much. Besides the blatant idiocy of implying a platform with known auto-root problems is more secure than one that lacks those problems, their numbers and headings are filled with inconsistencies. Sometimes they use a decimal point to represent 10^3 divisions and sometimes they don't use anything. Headings appear to duplicate each other, like the "Remote service password guessing" and "Remote service password bruteforce" while others need to be broken out. Finally, there are dozens of exploits "patched" each month for Windows but none of these technical problems shows up in their charts - only common problems are categorized. Is patch Tuesday a farce or are the fixes real and the problems worth tracking? Overall, this looks like another "get the facts" moment.
This article belongs in the "Something to keep thinking about until it falls completely apart" department.
He claims P2P makes discourages investors but his company is spending money on P2P. If P2P is worth NBC's money, it's worth anyone's. Is this they guy who write's speeches that declare "best year ever" and "competitive pressures force us to fire all of you" in the same breath?
Eat it trolls, I enjoy ignoring your posts to take advantage of your first post bravado. Keep pushing buttons for me, it has not done your bosses anygood. Discussion 2 rocks.
Someone told me they passed Acid 2001. Maui-wowie!
Seeing is believing. IE7 is a piece of shit. The next version of M$ anything always promises whatever people say they want. I'll believe M$ has gone standards compliant when they use ODF, and vorbis formats without discrimination. Until then, they are M$XML, Silverlight pushing assholes who won't play nice with anyone else.
Once again the problem is not the idea it's a lack of freedom. Social networks can and should be run as free software on each member's own computer. On my own machine, I can give you as much as I like. When I give my information to someone else, I have to trust they won't screw me. That's the problem with all third party sites and there are only degrees of violation between them. MySpace practices probably make the Facebook owners look like saints but none of us should need either. There are thousands of objections to people doing things for themselves but they all devolve to the fact that non free software vendors and network owners don't want people doing things for themselves and have provided them inadequate tools to help themselves.
It's fun to play M$ Mogul isn't it? You've got the pigopolist attitude right but your details are off. First, you forgot their syngernistic parasite friends in media, NBC, Disney TW and other real customers and co-conspirators. M$ has also have been known to throw chairs over petty accounts like the few thousands desktops of the City of Munich but just being a "business" does not give you the missionary treatment. Large businesses are often stuck in the ass like everyone else that is not M$. Don't worry though, if you were in charge of M$ you probably could not lose more than the 10 billion bucks a year the pros do. It's amazing what bad attitude can do, isn't it?
There are not to many people in the airport, there are too many people on no fly lists. Technically, one person is too many because proscriptions violate your right to due process of law as outlined in the bill of rights. There are 750,000 people slandered as fellons by these lists, so many that it's possible that too many of them could come to the airport one day and overwhelm the TSA agents there. I'm not sure what the real problem is, because people on the no fly lists are never arrested.
To recap, there are so many people on a secret, illegal list of terrorists who are so dangerous that they can't fly AND they are let go immediately AND there are not enough guards for them. Only someone working for Homeland Defense could worried about the details of such an idiotic task.
Furthermore, there's no way that an OEM could possibly bundle their choice of browser with a system. If it isn't created by MS, it can't possibly be installed on a Windows system.
You say it sarcastically, but that was one of the major findings of the federal anti-trust case against M$. OEMs who did otherwise were punished with higher prices for Windoze and hardware that did not work well with the same. M$ also committed numerous acts of technical sabotage which limited performance of software installed by users, erasing bookmarks, desktop links and other annoyances that they then blamed on Netscape.
The practice continued and is ongoing. APCI was designed specifically to thwart gnu/linux. M$ forbade the use of Vorbis formats as a condition of licensing "Plays for Sure" and Vista has numerous traps for competitors such as Adobe, Mozilla and anti-virus makers. M$ has made the entire electronics market a toxic swamp of anti-competitive practices and technological stagnation and survival of the least fit.
Perhaps you should look at that as "Man who Dumped Non Free Software Could not be Happier Eight Years Later." The other victim told the sad sorry story of trying to "go legit" with non free software. The moral of the story is that avoiding non free software is the best course of action.
Laura Didiot was also quoted supporting the BSA's mission. Her insight, that the BSA might have overstepped itself and could be contrary to the best interest of non free software owners, is both obvious and perennial. Threatenting customers is never good for business, that's why M$, Apple, Sun and others created the BSA whipping boy.
It's all bluff and bluster to keep users helpless and divided and it's all about to end.
Slashdot Mirror
Why "upgrade"? Amazing. Windows 2000 might be better than Vista. If there ever was a damning critique of non free software, this one is the best. Why on Earth would anyone cling to mid 90's software when they could have the latest and greatest on the same hardware with any GNU/Linux distribution?
...[long list of
Need to get 36.77GB of archives and give us $499 with 9.99/month service fee.
After this operation, 62.87GB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]?
Yeah, it would be an improvement but the dependencies would still suck life. Xandros has gone down that road with honest intentions. It's simply impossible to weld non free software together when one player throws a money wrench.
The news is that SP1 is a disaster that's slated to auto install itself. Thankfully, most people have avoided Vista and SP1 will seal the deal. People who have been patient enough to have used Vista for more than two days are going to give up M$ forever if SP1 screws their computer.
As for the slow news day sneer, put up or shut up. You write enough to complain about posting limits. Why don't you submit some more worthy news? Vista stories bore me too but not as much as the Opera stories that fill your journal.
but ActiveX will never be secure. I noticed this a week ago but did not think it worth mentioning. No one really believes IE will really be standards compliant or secure, do they?
It's nice of them to try, but you have to question the utility and sanity of such a massive NIH effort as IE is. At this point, an honest company would throw in the towel and call IE a file browser then try to catch up to Konqueror in that regard. M$ has gone it's own way so long that the quickest route for them to a standards compliant browser is to download Firefox.
This is only a trap for people who push OK without reading things. It's not Apple's fault that Windoze bombards users with so much crap that it's next to impossible for people to be careful. If you look at screen shots of the installer, you will see that everything is well explained and it's easy to opt out of the offer. Don't compare this to malware installers which don't ask or M$ which give you no choice in the matter. "IE8 or no more updates" is not happening here.
Would the average person notice the pinhole? Would you?
Comcast can not be trusted. Entertainment is getting creepier all the time.
Like the department statement of the article implied, a malicious person could plant these links on other sites, like Slashdot, where people have a habit of posting malicious links. Instead of looking at someone's ass, you will get a raid. It's like one click swatting - either very stupid or very malicious of the FBI. Because this is such an obvious issue, I'm betting on malice.
Like the department statement of the article implied, a malicious person could plant these links on other sites, like Slashdot, where people have a habit of posting malicious links. Instead of looking at someone's ass, you will get a raid. It's like one click swatting - either very stupid or very malicious of the FBI. Because this is such an obvious issue, I'm betting on malice.
Day and night? The only thing that can reconcile government's desire to use P2P efficiency and their censorship goals is filtered networks. Day and night may not be so far from each other.
What kind of security expert would say this:
What, did I miss privilege separation being introduced to Windows or does the above make as much sense as the popularity myth he tries to push? Properly designed multiuser OS ARE more secure than any version of Windows ever will be.
Twitter writes every post you don't like. He's in your computer, behind every bush and controlling half your cats by Jedi mind control. Do exactly what they say because Microsoft pays him to talk to you.
What do you think the marginal cost of a copy of Word is? If its $5, I'd be shocked.
The marginal cost to M$ is next to zero, the cost of the electricity required to make the copy. It would be a rip off for half that price because it costs you your liberty.
It was dumping Just the same. When there's a market of fixed size and your competitor needs to sell their product at D to make it's operating cost and you offer your competing product at anything from D- to zero, you have dumped your product. If you are able to do this because of some monopoly in another product, you have used something called monopoly rent and you have subsidized the destruction of your competitor. Then, when your competitor is out of business, you raise the price of your competing product to $400, the purpose of your dumping has been revealed.
There's more than dumping that happened here. M$ engaged in OS level anti-competitive practices unique to software, FUD unique to M$ and selective marketing/bribery that's all too common. It will be interesting to see exactly what kind of filth this new trial will prove.
I don't like the blame the user excuse, but that is what is being reported. If you scroll down to the Attack method, you see "Attack against the administrator/user (password stealing/sniffing)" is the overwhelming favorite.
This almost makes sense, but I don't trust the site much. Besides the blatant idiocy of implying a platform with known auto-root problems is more secure than one that lacks those problems, their numbers and headings are filled with inconsistencies. Sometimes they use a decimal point to represent 10^3 divisions and sometimes they don't use anything. Headings appear to duplicate each other, like the "Remote service password guessing" and "Remote service password bruteforce" while others need to be broken out. Finally, there are dozens of exploits "patched" each month for Windows but none of these technical problems shows up in their charts - only common problems are categorized. Is patch Tuesday a farce or are the fixes real and the problems worth tracking? Overall, this looks like another "get the facts" moment.
This article belongs in the "Something to keep thinking about until it falls completely apart" department.
He claims "piracy" discourages investors but his company is spending money on P2P. If P2P is worth NBC's money, despite "piracy", it's worth anyone's.
He claims P2P makes discourages investors but his company is spending money on P2P. If P2P is worth NBC's money, it's worth anyone's. Is this they guy who write's speeches that declare "best year ever" and "competitive pressures force us to fire all of you" in the same breath?
Here.
Eat it trolls, I enjoy ignoring your posts to take advantage of your first post bravado. Keep pushing buttons for me, it has not done your bosses anygood. Discussion 2 rocks.
The cat owners are too relaxed to fight about something so stupid.
Someone told me they passed Acid 2001. Maui-wowie!
Seeing is believing. IE7 is a piece of shit. The next version of M$ anything always promises whatever people say they want. I'll believe M$ has gone standards compliant when they use ODF, and vorbis formats without discrimination. Until then, they are M$XML, Silverlight pushing assholes who won't play nice with anyone else.
I can just imagine the nothing really new, M$ all Silverlight website.
Hopefully, the user will chose cancel over M$HTML
Once again the problem is not the idea it's a lack of freedom. Social networks can and should be run as free software on each member's own computer. On my own machine, I can give you as much as I like. When I give my information to someone else, I have to trust they won't screw me. That's the problem with all third party sites and there are only degrees of violation between them. MySpace practices probably make the Facebook owners look like saints but none of us should need either. There are thousands of objections to people doing things for themselves but they all devolve to the fact that non free software vendors and network owners don't want people doing things for themselves and have provided them inadequate tools to help themselves.
It's fun to play M$ Mogul isn't it? You've got the pigopolist attitude right but your details are off. First, you forgot their syngernistic parasite friends in media, NBC, Disney TW and other real customers and co-conspirators. M$ has also have been known to throw chairs over petty accounts like the few thousands desktops of the City of Munich but just being a "business" does not give you the missionary treatment. Large businesses are often stuck in the ass like everyone else that is not M$. Don't worry though, if you were in charge of M$ you probably could not lose more than the 10 billion bucks a year the pros do. It's amazing what bad attitude can do, isn't it?
There are not to many people in the airport, there are too many people on no fly lists. Technically, one person is too many because proscriptions violate your right to due process of law as outlined in the bill of rights. There are 750,000 people slandered as fellons by these lists, so many that it's possible that too many of them could come to the airport one day and overwhelm the TSA agents there. I'm not sure what the real problem is, because people on the no fly lists are never arrested.
To recap, there are so many people on a secret, illegal list of terrorists who are so dangerous that they can't fly AND they are let go immediately AND there are not enough guards for them. Only someone working for Homeland Defense could worried about the details of such an idiotic task.
Furthermore, there's no way that an OEM could possibly bundle their choice of browser with a system. If it isn't created by MS, it can't possibly be installed on a Windows system.
You say it sarcastically, but that was one of the major findings of the federal anti-trust case against M$. OEMs who did otherwise were punished with higher prices for Windoze and hardware that did not work well with the same. M$ also committed numerous acts of technical sabotage which limited performance of software installed by users, erasing bookmarks, desktop links and other annoyances that they then blamed on Netscape.
The practice continued and is ongoing. APCI was designed specifically to thwart gnu/linux. M$ forbade the use of Vorbis formats as a condition of licensing "Plays for Sure" and Vista has numerous traps for competitors such as Adobe, Mozilla and anti-virus makers. M$ has made the entire electronics market a toxic swamp of anti-competitive practices and technological stagnation and survival of the least fit.
... and there will be no end of work for you.
Perhaps you should look at that as "Man who Dumped Non Free Software Could not be Happier Eight Years Later." The other victim told the sad sorry story of trying to "go legit" with non free software. The moral of the story is that avoiding non free software is the best course of action.
Laura Didiot was also quoted supporting the BSA's mission. Her insight, that the BSA might have overstepped itself and could be contrary to the best interest of non free software owners, is both obvious and perennial. Threatenting customers is never good for business, that's why M$, Apple, Sun and others created the BSA whipping boy.
It's all bluff and bluster to keep users helpless and divided and it's all about to end.
Does this Zango company make an adblocker too? I recently read that they block spam email. Would you subscribe me to your posts?