Runing./configure or make or make install could cause just as large a problem. Do you read through those scripts before running them?
Furthermore, buffer overflows could exist in just about any program. There could be one in emacs right now, triggered by reading a file into the buffer. Then it would be "scary.. The fact that a simple text file can cause such a big problem is really sad."
Nice attempt to evade the issue by raking up redundant matters. The crux of the problem here is that MS Word needs or provides Internet access for some of it's functions. Even if it had any buffer overflows, the problem would not be exploitable from remote systems.
The fact that Word is designed to occasionally talk over the internet coupled with it's hooks into the OS via things like VBA etc. is the problem. In fact, the main problem here is not Word or Office, it is the Windows architecture that is vulnerable.
For a really useful and insightfult article on Open Source Economics, I thought Bruce Perens' article was the best.... no catchy graphs, tables and colours, but still very thoughtful and well-researched.
Just so we compare apples to apples... considering the bloated h/w needs for Vista, and considering it comes form the 800lb gorilla.. Greedy Gorilla sounds very 'apt'.
I think Vista articles on Slashdot must come with a Greedy Gorilla icon... given that we're seeing several articles a week already.
Re:My predictions for Wndows over the next year...
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 1
And here's my point-wise rejoinder:
Assumes that in 12 months time, retailers will still be selling hardware in new computers that would be compatible only with XP but not with Vista. Assumes that Vista is (for some reason) less stable, compatible and secure than XP.
Rejoinder: I have not assumed any of these... read my other posts for reference. Where I live, we generally buy PCs custom-built, not from OEMs. With Vista, the specs for the PC will go up atleast 4-fold for similar performance as on XP - hence the price increase.
Quote: "The Home segment will need connectivity to lots of 2-yr old peripherals..." Poor assumption. Remember, you're talking about buying new retail computers, which usually ship with peripherals. Rejoinder: In the home-segment, people upgrade only the PC, or often add another PC to the existing bunch of PCs and peripherals. And when I say peripherals, I mean things like USB cameras, photo printers, wireless devices etc.
Quote: "and they will be pissed that neither Vista supports their peripherals, NOR the hardware vendor is keen to write certified drivers for Vista...." Moot as per above. Incidentally, there are two silly assumptions behind this statement: 1) that Vista will not support the peripherals out of the box, and 2) that vendors will need to (but not want to) write Vista drivers. Rejoinder: There is a BBC article that says no support for recently acquired Creative sound cards in Vista. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6407419.stm
Quote: "The 'build-your-own' segment of PC makers will suffer heavily, since Vista seems specifically designed to discourage this market...You use unsubstantiated speculation to make your point. Where does "seems" come from?
Rejoinder: It comes from in-person meetings with my hardware vendor for the past 10 years.
Quote: "the Vista desktop PC is going to be twice as epensive [sic] as the XP equivlent [sic]" Wild and unfounded assumption. Vista (w/o Aero) will run on most "modern" PCs. You're assuming that in 12 months time, retailers will still be selling non-Vista-compatible computers that are already starting to be phased out....
Rejoinder: Nice twisting of facts... I said the Vista-compatible PC will be twice as expensive... and now you're dumping the Aero... without Aero, what is great about Vista compared to XP???? Retailers will still be shipping Vista PCs... but the price for the average home PC a year from now will be almost double the current price... bcos of Vista's bloated requirements for same performance.
Quote: "mgmnt is going to frown at incompetent sysadmins who never planned for migrating away from Windows and Office lock-ins." Assumes that management actually has a clue about computers. Rejoinder: Again, nice twist. Management appoint sysadmins to get a clue about computers... and mgmnt have a very good clue about money and budgets. When they see twice the budgets for the same no. of desktops, you're gonna see some red faces and pink slips, a year from now.
Quote: "Maintaining support requests from new Vista users is going to be a huge new headache for lethargic sysadmins." Again, assumes that Vista will require more support requests or that support will be fundamentally different in nature than support for previous Windows versions. Unfounded. Does Dameware and Remote support tools work with Vista? Ever handled customer support for a 1000+ workforce? I have.
Quote: "What if the [a web application] does not run on Vista?" What if it actually runs better? Wow, hypotheticals are fun. Rejoinder: I didn't quote web applications - Domino Web client is still not ready for Vista from IBM.. or so I heard. Likewise, the desktop CAD application (similar to Autocad) isn't ready for Vista yet... expected end 2007 only as per current indications.
Quote: "Vista appears t
Re:My predictions for Wndows over the next year...
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 0
Have you actually tried running vista on 512mb ram? I do, every single day, on my 3 year old notebook at home. Thats vista ultimate, by the way, not home basic. Office 2007 ultimate and Visual studio 2005 are also used daily.....I think the only fearmongering and FUD is coming from you, because my personal experience seems to contradict the lies you're trying to spread.
From the Dell site: http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/sol utions/en/winvista?c=us&cs=&l=en&s=dhs
Basic Windows Vista Experience - No Aero........... 512MB RAM.......Great for... Booting the Operating System, without running applications or games And this, without the Aero... which is all the Wow you're going to get with Vista. And according to Dell, you'll need 1GB to run Office, docs and spreadsheets; 2GB RAM to edit some pics etc.
If you care to stop FUD, you ought to be contacting Dell.. more people will read their website than my comments on Slashdot, I guess.
Re:My predictions for Wndows over the next year...
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
This is pretty ridiculous. Most computers bought within the last year will run Vista and essentially all new computers can (the cheapest PC from Dell would work fine with Vista). As for drivers, I doubt there will be any problems in 12 months (from what I've heard from people using Vista now, most of them are already resolved).
Where I live, most computers are bought not from big brand OEMs but assmebled and custom-built to specs. The average config today is 256 / 512MB RAM, no special graphics card - the on-board chipset is used, and it takes 8MB VRAM from the main RAM via a BIOS setting. This with XP is good enough for home use. This way, the custom-built PC is 25% cheaper than a branded one with similar specs, and about 40% cheaper with top-of-the line specs.
Last week, I met with one such h/w vendor and he confessed that with Vista he is forced to go in for branded boxes, because it's very very complex and complicated to build truly Vista compatible systems. He says nobody has reliable information on graphics cards, sound cards, chipsets, webcam support, USB camera support, wireless card support, FireWire (IEEE 1394?) support etc. This has cut down 'built-to-order' PC sales by 40% over the last few months. This is driving him to get his support team familiar with Ubuntu.
Where the hell are you getting this from? You're claiming that Vista runs worse on off the shelf parts as compared to Dell?
I'm sorry, I can't read any more of this. Have fun in that little fantasy land of yours.
As quoted above, I'm getting this from the h/w vendor with whom I've been dealing for over 10 years now. Vista seems to discriminate between systems from big-time OEMs and custom-built ones. The main culprit is the amount of misinformation on device drivers etc. Hardware that's worked fine with XP WITHOUT DRIVER issues crashes regularly with Vista.
On further enquiry, it appears big OEMs actually source motherboards from Asus, Gigabyte, Mercury etc.... but the performance of Vista is still degraded on these same boards when 'assembled'. One would conclude that Vista reads the BIOS (which is the only difference between braded and custom-built kits) and behaves better if it detects a familiar OEM BIOS.
Re:My predictions for Wndows over the next year...
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 1
I've been running it on my Toshiba Notebook for quite a while and it runs just fine. I didn't have any Driver Issues, No Memory Complaints, in fact, no issues at all. And my computer is about 4 years old. It has a 1.3mhz Celeron processor with (1) 512 meg Ram and (2) 64meg video card. Not a beast, but it runs at least as well as XP does. In some cases, better.
I'm replying to your post since it's similar to 2 others, and you've stated the same points:
1. 512MB RAM is simply NOT ENOUGH for Vista.... unless you're running Home Basic. According to Dell, it says on it's official website that "512MB RAM is good enough for just booting, but without running any applications or games". Are you implying that Dell is spreading FUD to boost RAM sales? Most people who've used Vista agree that 1GB is minimum, 2GB is recommended to get the same performance as on XP for all tasks.
2. About the 64MB RAM card. Where I live, people do not use computers to play games... it's used for browsing the web, getting programming skills etc. Most PCs do not have any VRAM at all... it's all whatever comes with the motherboard, and it's generally 8MB. The only compelling reason to 'upgrade' from XP to Vista would be the Aero stuff. And according to many sites incluing the BBC, that requires DX10 and 128MB VRAM.
So unless Dell and the BBC are engaged in fear-mongering and FUD, my position is justified: A year from now, a new Windows PC will leave an enormous hole in the pocket, if one cares for similar performance that is currently available on XP.
Re:My predictions for Wndows over the next year...
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 1
you will need to invest in Vista.... at (3). a steep increase in hardware"...Pure FUD - Vista ticks along just fine on (1). any graphics card bought in the last 2-3 years, and certainly on all current cards. This isn't Doom 4 we're talking about here; just Windows. Also, it's not like it can't run in the good old 2d mode either.(2). In terms of RAM, 1GB is just dandy for running conventional apps (and yes, I speak from experience rather than heresay). I mean, if you can 'run' XP on 8-MHz Pentium with 20 MB RAM, Vista on surely run on any machine bought in the last couple of years.
1. To my knowledge, the minimum requirements on graphics are 128MB VRAM and Direct X 10 support... and my post was about investing in a new system. XP could run on a built-in VGA chipset that took 8MB VRAM from the main RAM; and so this means a steep increase in hardware pricing.
2. Also, the average PC config these days is 256MB RAM, so 1GB minimum and 2GB recommended implies a steep increase on motherboard pricing as well; just in order to run the OS providing the same functionality; if one doesn't care for games and Aero as you mentioned. And where I live, RAM doesn't grow on trees and tends to cost 15% to 20% of total h/w price.
3. Hence, it is NOT FUD to state that sticking with Windows on a new PC a year from now will entail a steep increase in hardware and software costs.
My predictions for Wndows over the next year...
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
In 12 months time, the only XP you can get will be pirated copies. That means if you want to stick to Windows on your new PC, you will ned to invest in Vista.... at a steep increase in hardware, software cost and maintenance cost (driver issues, bug fixes etc)
The Home segment will need connectivity to lots of 2-yr old peripherals... and they will be pissed that neither Vista supports their peripherals, NOR the hardware vendor is keen to write certified drivers for Vista.... this will push hardware makers to go the way of open source drivers, and supporting Linux. Microsoft will be too much of a moving target since old drivers and hacks will no longer work with Vista. Result: Hardware and peripheral makers switch to Linux, and take home users with them.
The 'build-your-own' segment of PC makers will suffer heavily, since Vista seems specifically designed to discourage this market, and promote large OEMs like Dell and HP. The stability of Vista on custom-built PCs seems much degraded than big-brand PCs of inferior specs.
Result: Build-your-own PC makers move to Linux, and start adding value to their offerings instead of just loading OEM Vista.
When it comes to corporate PCs, there are basically two categories: 1. Those who have Corporate licenses for a fixed no. of desktops will stick to XP or 2000 or even NT 4.0.... (my nephew in Bangalore is migrating server farms of Shell from NT4 to Win2K... he's having fun managing those mailboxes and migration to Active Directory!). Result: Vista on the corporate desktop will have to wait a loooong time for big corporates with site licenses.
2. Corporates without site licenses will be faced with a choice: Either buy new PCs with Vista, forking out large sums for jumbo hardware and bloated software... OR Migrate the desktop to Linux.
Corporate sysadmins have been notoriously lazy for a decade and more... (I know, I was one until recently). Sysadmin usually meant applying patches and Service Packs, blindly installing the latest OSes from MS, firewalls and IDS etc. Until now, sysadmin seldom got involved in IT planning, Standardising on formats, protocols, identity management, entitlement, provisioning etc.
With Vista, the price for this laziness is being increased steeply - the Vista desktop PC is going to be twice as epensive as the XP equivlent, and mgmnt is going to frown at incompetent sysadmins who never planned for migrating away from Windows and Office lock-ins. Even if the desktop gets Vista by default from the OEM, the servers and apps are still going to be on old versions of Windows or Linux servers for a long time to come. Maintaining support requests from new Vista users is going to be a huge new headache for lethargic sysadmins. Result: New hardware gets Vista; old hardware remains on existing Windows versions.
The few sysadmins who can see what's coming are alredy planning to do away with Desktop apps and standardise on Web apps that work with non-IE browsers on non-Windows OSes AS WELL AS existing Windows boxes with IE. This is what we're doing at our firm - except for some CAD software and call-centre software, all other desktops are shifting to web-based apps in this year. What if the CAD appln does not run on Vista? What if IBM doesn't release a Vista-compatible client by this year? We don't have control over those... but the next year should be interesting. Vista appears to be an attempt to arm-twist the entire spectrum of the IT ecosystem into the Microsoft-way. And that is why it is doomed to fail spectacularly.
Unlike previous versions, Vista will mean changing EVERY aspect of current IT functioning. Which is why it is a definite victory for Linux and Free Software, because at last, it will be more easier on the Desktop than adaoting to Vista.
By definition, spyware is one that sends 'personally identifiable information' to a target server without the user's explicit consent. It is reliably established that Windows Genuine Advantage and so-called Critical Updates from Microsoft can be classified thus...
O'Reilly and others have proposed a code of conduct which could include restrictions like the outlawing of anonymous accounts."...
Anonymous Cowards in Slashdot have been the single largest source of valuable information and dialogue, in the single largest technology forum (Slashdot) over a large period of time.
Let's remember that IBM is still the biggest 'Unix' vendor - AIX. IBM's association with Linux may be purely incidental. They still maintain BOTH branches - Linux and AIX in their offerings. The case with SCO could've been closed months ago... wonder whether IBM's taking the matter REALLY seriously.
How will this drama unfold? Given the parallel SCO - Novell case that'd be heard first, I guess it could appear Novell, not SCO holds copyrights... and SCO vs IBM gets dissolved.
Given the negative publicity surrounding the MS-Novell deal, it's going to look foolish if Novell suddenly sues IBM and shuts down other distros except SuSE.
Anyways, it now appears SCO is just a front for IBM.. or the other way round!
I want Microsoft's lawyers. I could get charged with being a bank robber, then make a deal where I agree to only rob a small bit from banks, and then I'd demand compensation for loss of earnings.
It's worse than that... and it's not funny any more.
MS has been found guilty of abusing it's monopoly position in the Windows desktop market... and the EU has determined that it continues this abuse on other related product and service markets. Now, to introduce meaningful competition, the EU stipulates that MS has to reveal secretive protocols, which are the 'tools' for extending the monopoly into other markets.
5% server market revenues would be a very high barrier for competitors, according to the EU Inspectors approved by Microsoft themselves... they feel it should be close to 0%. They estimate that at 5%, it could take more than 7 years for meaningful competition. Coming to your robbing-the-bank analogy, it's like MS has a monopoly in bank-robbery the details and methods of which they will not divulge... except for 5% of their revenues. Note that he daylight robbery is still going on!
My GF just got a new Vista laptop a few weeks ago, and I dumped her 60 GB mess of music onto it from various places. She has spent a few hours each night for the past few days (?????) organizing everything with correct file names and meta data, and she's blown away by how easy it is.
Were you talking about your GF or Vista? Either way, it's a wasted effort on/.
1. Only 14 people are running Vista as on date, the rest have upgraded to the old, familiar XP and never looked back. 2. Of these, 10 machines are in Microsoft, without any CD/DVD drives or USB ports - so no external booting is possible. 3. 3 of the 4 remaining machines are with journalists and 'independent' analysts - so they can be 'trusted' to keep shut. 4. Now, HOW are YOU going to protect your Vista against this Bootkit? Yes, YOU! You'll just upgrade to XP as well? That's fine then. Problem solved.
I find it hard to believe they cannot find a sponsor (maybe even a computer shop) to give them a copy to play with.
I think although they mentioned cost as the excuse, they might've been scared about something in the EULA of the final version which could possibly make their experiment or publishing it's results a criminal offence.
Incidentally, I'd like Mark Russinovich's detailed response to this, but now he's a full-time MS employee it would probably be useless.
This was never a serious problem before the web, people knew that movies cost millions, they bought tickets and went to see them. If you have a whole generation growing up thats used to taking those movies for nothing, you are describing the death of an industry...
The reason it costs millions to produce movies is because, until the web came around, the producers had basically a monopoly cartel over a captive audience AND Distribution channel COMBINED. The producers and distributors traditionally made lots more money than the artists.
When every other business adapts to changing technology, why can't the content providers do likewise? Why should ALL internet users.. including on corporate networks.. be subject to this ridiculous persecution just because someone suspects them of stealing their so-called IP?
Adapt or perish... please don't advocate screwing the PC industry and the Tech industry to protect the seedier elements of the so-called Media industry.
They're essentially claiming that most of their audience don't know that it costs money to produce movies, or music, or software -- that people will come to "expect" such content for free.
So how come these knowledgeable content providers are providing Free Rootkits that cost lots of money to produce? Customers aren't stupid - they don't mind paying fair price for their CDs - they just hate all these Encumbrances, and being made to jump through hoops, and being spied upon like criminals.
Customers would like the media they purchase to be free of encumbrances.
Content providers.... the only thing they want to supply free seems to be rootkits.
If that's the attitude the content providers take... I say, let us have stage plays again, and ban all recording devices during performances... let's see what market size we're talking about for such 'content'.
Slashdot Mirror
Runing ./configure or make or make install could cause just as large a problem. Do you read through those scripts before running them?
Furthermore, buffer overflows could exist in just about any program. There could be one in emacs right now, triggered by reading a file into the buffer. Then it would be "scary.. The fact that a simple text file can cause such a big problem is really sad."
Nice attempt to evade the issue by raking up redundant matters. The crux of the problem here is that MS Word needs or provides Internet access for some of it's functions. Even if it had any buffer overflows, the problem would not be exploitable from remote systems.
The fact that Word is designed to occasionally talk over the internet coupled with it's hooks into the OS via things like VBA etc. is the problem. In fact, the main problem here is not Word or Office, it is the Windows architecture that is vulnerable.
Did I miss any?
Yes. Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of MS shills and Apple fanboys... oh wait! Isn't that Slashdot already?
Oops.. sorry, wrong link. Corrected here:
http://perens.com/Articles/Economic.html
For a really useful and insightfult article on Open Source Economics, I thought Bruce Perens' article was the best.... no catchy graphs, tables and colours, but still very thoughtful and well-researched.
0 07/computer-2007-article.html
http://www.riehle.org/computer-science/research/2
IBM has nothing to do with the origins of 'Open Source' or Free software for that matter.. they just tagged along.
Just so we compare apples to apples... considering the bloated h/w needs for Vista, and considering it comes form the 800lb gorilla.. Greedy Gorilla sounds very 'apt'.
I think Vista articles on Slashdot must come with a Greedy Gorilla icon... given that we're seeing several articles a week already.
And here's my point-wise rejoinder:
... and mgmnt have a very good clue about money and budgets. When they see twice the budgets for the same no. of desktops, you're gonna see some red faces and pink slips, a year from now.
Assumes that in 12 months time, retailers will still be selling hardware in new computers that would be compatible only with XP but not with Vista. Assumes that Vista is (for some reason) less stable, compatible and secure than XP.
Rejoinder: I have not assumed any of these... read my other posts for reference. Where I live, we generally buy PCs custom-built, not from OEMs. With Vista, the specs for the PC will go up atleast 4-fold for similar performance as on XP - hence the price increase.
Quote: "The Home segment will need connectivity to lots of 2-yr old peripherals..."
Poor assumption. Remember, you're talking about buying new retail computers, which usually ship with peripherals.
Rejoinder: In the home-segment, people upgrade only the PC, or often add another PC to the existing bunch of PCs and peripherals. And when I say peripherals, I mean things like USB cameras, photo printers, wireless devices etc.
Quote: "and they will be pissed that neither Vista supports their peripherals, NOR the hardware vendor is keen to write certified drivers for Vista...."
Moot as per above. Incidentally, there are two silly assumptions behind this statement: 1) that Vista will not support the peripherals out of the box, and 2) that vendors will need to (but not want to) write Vista drivers.
Rejoinder: There is a BBC article that says no support for recently acquired Creative sound cards in Vista.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6407419.stm
Quote: "The 'build-your-own' segment of PC makers will suffer heavily, since Vista seems specifically designed to discourage this market...You use unsubstantiated speculation to make your point. Where does "seems" come from?
Rejoinder: It comes from in-person meetings with my hardware vendor for the past 10 years.
Quote: "the Vista desktop PC is going to be twice as epensive [sic] as the XP equivlent [sic]"
Wild and unfounded assumption. Vista (w/o Aero) will run on most "modern" PCs. You're assuming that in 12 months time, retailers will still be selling non-Vista-compatible computers that are already starting to be phased out....
Rejoinder: Nice twisting of facts... I said the Vista-compatible PC will be twice as expensive... and now you're dumping the Aero... without Aero, what is great about Vista compared to XP???? Retailers will still be shipping Vista PCs... but the price for the average home PC a year from now will be almost double the current price... bcos of Vista's bloated requirements for same performance.
Quote: "mgmnt is going to frown at incompetent sysadmins who never planned for migrating away from Windows and Office lock-ins."
Assumes that management actually has a clue about computers.
Rejoinder: Again, nice twist. Management appoint sysadmins to get a clue about computers
Quote: "Maintaining support requests from new Vista users is going to be a huge new headache for lethargic sysadmins."
Again, assumes that Vista will require more support requests or that support will be fundamentally different in nature than support for previous Windows versions. Unfounded.
Does Dameware and Remote support tools work with Vista? Ever handled customer support for a 1000+ workforce? I have.
Quote: "What if the [a web application] does not run on Vista?"
What if it actually runs better? Wow, hypotheticals are fun.
Rejoinder: I didn't quote web applications - Domino Web client is still not ready for Vista from IBM.. or so I heard. Likewise, the desktop CAD application (similar to Autocad) isn't ready for Vista yet... expected end 2007 only as per current indications.
Quote: "Vista appears t
From the Dell site:
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/so
And according to Dell, you'll need 1GB to run Office, docs and spreadsheets; 2GB RAM to edit some pics etc.
If you care to stop FUD, you ought to be contacting Dell.. more people will read their website than my comments on Slashdot, I guess.
This is pretty ridiculous. Most computers bought within the last year will run Vista and essentially all new computers can (the cheapest PC from Dell would work fine with Vista). As for drivers, I doubt there will be any problems in 12 months (from what I've heard from people using Vista now, most of them are already resolved).
... but the performance of Vista is still degraded on these same boards when 'assembled'. One would conclude that Vista reads the BIOS (which is the only difference between braded and custom-built kits) and behaves better if it detects a familiar OEM BIOS.
Where I live, most computers are bought not from big brand OEMs but assmebled and custom-built to specs. The average config today is 256 / 512MB RAM, no special graphics card - the on-board chipset is used, and it takes 8MB VRAM from the main RAM via a BIOS setting. This with XP is good enough for home use. This way, the custom-built PC is 25% cheaper than a branded one with similar specs, and about 40% cheaper with top-of-the line specs.
Last week, I met with one such h/w vendor and he confessed that with Vista he is forced to go in for branded boxes, because it's very very complex and complicated to build truly Vista compatible systems. He says nobody has reliable information on graphics cards, sound cards, chipsets, webcam support, USB camera support, wireless card support, FireWire (IEEE 1394?) support etc. This has cut down 'built-to-order' PC sales by 40% over the last few months. This is driving him to get his support team familiar with Ubuntu.
Where the hell are you getting this from? You're claiming that Vista runs worse on off the shelf parts as compared to Dell?
I'm sorry, I can't read any more of this. Have fun in that little fantasy land of yours.
As quoted above, I'm getting this from the h/w vendor with whom I've been dealing for over 10 years now. Vista seems to discriminate between systems from big-time OEMs and custom-built ones. The main culprit is the amount of misinformation on device drivers etc. Hardware that's worked fine with XP WITHOUT DRIVER issues crashes regularly with Vista.
On further enquiry, it appears big OEMs actually source motherboards from Asus, Gigabyte, Mercury etc.
I've been running it on my Toshiba Notebook for quite a while and it runs just fine. I didn't have any Driver Issues, No Memory Complaints, in fact, no issues at all. And my computer is about 4 years old. It has a 1.3mhz Celeron processor with (1) 512 meg Ram and (2) 64meg video card. Not a beast, but it runs at least as well as XP does. In some cases, better.
I'm replying to your post since it's similar to 2 others, and you've stated the same points:
1. 512MB RAM is simply NOT ENOUGH for Vista.... unless you're running Home Basic. According to Dell, it says on it's official website that "512MB RAM is good enough for just booting, but without running any applications or games". Are you implying that Dell is spreading FUD to boost RAM sales? Most people who've used Vista agree that 1GB is minimum, 2GB is recommended to get the same performance as on XP for all tasks.
2. About the 64MB RAM card. Where I live, people do not use computers to play games... it's used for browsing the web, getting programming skills etc. Most PCs do not have any VRAM at all... it's all whatever comes with the motherboard, and it's generally 8MB. The only compelling reason to 'upgrade' from XP to Vista would be the Aero stuff. And according to many sites incluing the BBC, that requires DX10 and 128MB VRAM.
So unless Dell and the BBC are engaged in fear-mongering and FUD, my position is justified: A year from now, a new Windows PC will leave an enormous hole in the pocket, if one cares for similar performance that is currently available on XP.
you will need to invest in Vista.... at (3). a steep increase in hardware"...Pure FUD - Vista ticks along just fine on (1). any graphics card bought in the last 2-3 years, and certainly on all current cards. This isn't Doom 4 we're talking about here; just Windows. Also, it's not like it can't run in the good old 2d mode either.(2). In terms of RAM, 1GB is just dandy for running conventional apps (and yes, I speak from experience rather than heresay). I mean, if you can 'run' XP on 8-MHz Pentium with 20 MB RAM, Vista on surely run on any machine bought in the last couple of years.
1. To my knowledge, the minimum requirements on graphics are 128MB VRAM and Direct X 10 support... and my post was about investing in a new system. XP could run on a built-in VGA chipset that took 8MB VRAM from the main RAM; and so this means a steep increase in hardware pricing.
2. Also, the average PC config these days is 256MB RAM, so 1GB minimum and 2GB recommended implies a steep increase on motherboard pricing as well; just in order to run the OS providing the same functionality; if one doesn't care for games and Aero as you mentioned. And where I live, RAM doesn't grow on trees and tends to cost 15% to 20% of total h/w price.
3. Hence, it is NOT FUD to state that sticking with Windows on a new PC a year from now will entail a steep increase in hardware and software costs.
In 12 months time, the only XP you can get will be pirated copies.
That means if you want to stick to Windows on your new PC, you will ned to invest in Vista.... at a steep increase in hardware, software cost and maintenance cost (driver issues, bug fixes etc)
The Home segment will need connectivity to lots of 2-yr old peripherals... and they will be pissed that neither Vista supports their peripherals, NOR the hardware vendor is keen to write certified drivers for Vista.... this will push hardware makers to go the way of open source drivers, and supporting Linux. Microsoft will be too much of a moving target since old drivers and hacks will no longer work with Vista. Result: Hardware and peripheral makers switch to Linux, and take home users with them.
The 'build-your-own' segment of PC makers will suffer heavily, since Vista seems specifically designed to discourage this market, and promote large OEMs like Dell and HP. The stability of Vista on custom-built PCs seems much degraded than big-brand PCs of inferior specs.
Result: Build-your-own PC makers move to Linux, and start adding value to their offerings instead of just loading OEM Vista.
When it comes to corporate PCs, there are basically two categories:
1. Those who have Corporate licenses for a fixed no. of desktops will stick to XP or 2000 or even NT 4.0.... (my nephew in Bangalore is migrating server farms of Shell from NT4 to Win2K... he's having fun managing those mailboxes and migration to Active Directory!). Result: Vista on the corporate desktop will have to wait a loooong time for big corporates with site licenses.
2. Corporates without site licenses will be faced with a choice: Either buy new PCs with Vista, forking out large sums for jumbo hardware and bloated software...
OR
Migrate the desktop to Linux.
Corporate sysadmins have been notoriously lazy for a decade and more... (I know, I was one until recently). Sysadmin usually meant applying patches and Service Packs, blindly installing the latest OSes from MS, firewalls and IDS etc. Until now, sysadmin seldom got involved in IT planning, Standardising on formats, protocols, identity management, entitlement, provisioning etc.
With Vista, the price for this laziness is being increased steeply - the Vista desktop PC is going to be twice as epensive as the XP equivlent, and mgmnt is going to frown at incompetent sysadmins who never planned for migrating away from Windows and Office lock-ins. Even if the desktop gets Vista by default from the OEM, the servers and apps are still going to be on old versions of Windows or Linux servers for a long time to come. Maintaining support requests from new Vista users is going to be a huge new headache for lethargic sysadmins. Result: New hardware gets Vista; old hardware remains on existing Windows versions.
The few sysadmins who can see what's coming are alredy planning to do away with Desktop apps and standardise on Web apps that work with non-IE browsers on non-Windows OSes AS WELL AS existing Windows boxes with IE. This is what we're doing at our firm - except for some CAD software and call-centre software, all other desktops are shifting to web-based apps in this year. What if the CAD appln does not run on Vista? What if IBM doesn't release a Vista-compatible client by this year? We don't have control over those... but the next year should be interesting. Vista appears to be an attempt to arm-twist the entire spectrum of the IT ecosystem into the Microsoft-way. And that is why it is doomed to fail spectacularly.
Unlike previous versions, Vista will mean changing EVERY aspect of current IT functioning. Which is why it is a definite victory for Linux and Free Software, because at last, it will be more easier on the Desktop than adaoting to Vista.
By definition, spyware is one that sends 'personally identifiable information' to a target server without the user's explicit consent. It is reliably established that Windows Genuine Advantage and so-called Critical Updates from Microsoft can be classified thus...
Also data from 'crashed programs' etc.
So why is the parent modded troll?
O'Reilly and others have proposed a code of conduct which could include restrictions like the outlawing of anonymous accounts."...
Anonymous Cowards in Slashdot have been the single largest source of valuable information and dialogue, in the single largest technology forum (Slashdot) over a large period of time.
No wonder I didn't RTFA.
Let's remember that IBM is still the biggest 'Unix' vendor - AIX. IBM's association with Linux may be purely incidental. They still maintain BOTH branches - Linux and AIX in their offerings. The case with SCO could've been closed months ago... wonder whether IBM's taking the matter REALLY seriously.
How will this drama unfold? Given the parallel SCO - Novell case that'd be heard first, I guess it could appear Novell, not SCO holds copyrights... and SCO vs IBM gets dissolved.
Given the negative publicity surrounding the MS-Novell deal, it's going to look foolish if Novell suddenly sues IBM and shuts down other distros except SuSE.
Anyways, it now appears SCO is just a front for IBM.. or the other way round!
And I thought... like, it's a cross between a chipset and a motherboard, genetically engineered by NVidia!
Just some more inane marketing speak.
This is just an advertisement manifesting as news! Was there any info in the slashdot summary other than a new product has been released?
Even a simple, yes/no/sort of would have been more helpful than nothing.
TFA is interesting and all, but it should have a summary. Not a teaser!
You'll find those in the Tagging beta, shortly!
I want Microsoft's lawyers. I could get charged with being a bank robber, then make a deal where I agree to only rob a small bit from banks, and then I'd demand compensation for loss of earnings.
It's worse than that... and it's not funny any more.
MS has been found guilty of abusing it's monopoly position in the Windows desktop market... and the EU has determined that it continues this abuse on other related product and service markets. Now, to introduce meaningful competition, the EU stipulates that MS has to reveal secretive protocols, which are the 'tools' for extending the monopoly into other markets.
5% server market revenues would be a very high barrier for competitors, according to the EU Inspectors approved by Microsoft themselves... they feel it should be close to 0%. They estimate that at 5%, it could take more than 7 years for meaningful competition. Coming to your robbing-the-bank analogy, it's like MS has a monopoly in bank-robbery the details and methods of which they will not divulge... except for 5% of their revenues. Note that he daylight robbery is still going on!
The US has a monkey president ..[/obligatory]
Monkey --> Ape --> Gorilla --> Chimpanzee --> Missing Link? --> Man
Most people think the president has evolved to Chimp atleast.
http://www.bushorchimp.com/
When dissing, diss properly, or do not diss at all.
My GF just got a new Vista laptop a few weeks ago, and I dumped her 60 GB mess of music onto it from various places. She has spent a few hours each night for the past few days (?????) organizing everything with correct file names and meta data, and she's blown away by how easy it is.
/.
Were you talking about your GF or Vista? Either way, it's a wasted effort on
1. Only 14 people are running Vista as on date, the rest have upgraded to the old, familiar XP and never looked back.
2. Of these, 10 machines are in Microsoft, without any CD/DVD drives or USB ports - so no external booting is possible.
3. 3 of the 4 remaining machines are with journalists and 'independent' analysts - so they can be 'trusted' to keep shut.
4. Now, HOW are YOU going to protect your Vista against this Bootkit? Yes, YOU! You'll just upgrade to XP as well? That's fine then. Problem solved.
I find it hard to believe they cannot find a sponsor (maybe even a computer shop) to give them a copy to play with.
I think although they mentioned cost as the excuse, they might've been scared about something in the EULA of the final version which could possibly make their experiment or publishing it's results a criminal offence.
Incidentally, I'd like Mark Russinovich's detailed response to this, but now he's a full-time MS employee it would probably be useless.
This was never a serious problem before the web, people knew that movies cost millions, they bought tickets and went to see them. If you have a whole generation growing up thats used to taking those movies for nothing, you are describing the death of an industry...
The reason it costs millions to produce movies is because, until the web came around, the producers had basically a monopoly cartel over a captive audience AND Distribution channel COMBINED. The producers and distributors traditionally made lots more money than the artists.
When every other business adapts to changing technology, why can't the content providers do likewise? Why should ALL internet users.. including on corporate networks.. be subject to this ridiculous persecution just because someone suspects them of stealing their so-called IP?
Adapt or perish... please don't advocate screwing the PC industry and the Tech industry to protect the seedier elements of the so-called Media industry.
They're essentially claiming that most of their audience don't know that it costs money to produce movies, or music, or software -- that people will come to "expect" such content for free.
So how come these knowledgeable content providers are providing Free Rootkits that cost lots of money to produce? Customers aren't stupid - they don't mind paying fair price for their CDs - they just hate all these Encumbrances, and being made to jump through hoops, and being spied upon like criminals.
Customers would like the media they purchase to be free of encumbrances.
.... the only thing they want to supply free seems to be rootkits.
Content providers
If that's the attitude the content providers take... I say, let us have stage plays again, and ban all recording devices during performances... let's see what market size we're talking about for such 'content'.
and got "Dear Blair, let's set so double the killer delete select all ..."
Suffice to say, they settled with Linux. The Microsoft version had psychic powers, apparently!