That's too bad!:( I actually considered coding something like this once, and came to the conclusion that the most feasible implementation would be slow (screen capture each app, resize, hide all windows, show images). How does OSX achieve the effect? I'm assuming their GUI system has built in capabilities for scaling of application windows.
'Just what we want for the kernel of a server OS'?
Avalon is a GUI engine, and has nothing to do with the kernel. As that other slashdot article clearly stated (and anyone who does a little research on the Longhorn beta would know), for those systems lacking powerful video cards, Longhorn will look and behave like Windows XP.
If you look at their APIs, they have been getting cleaner and more consistent in the past few years. Just look at their.NET Foundation classes. The Win32 API is an abomination, I would welcome an overhaul.
As much as you wish this were true, the facts say differently. During his five years, MS profits increased by more than 60%. I shouldn't even need to point out how they've branched out into many new fields under his watch. Doesn't look to me like 'treading water'. If anything, he's positioning MS so that Windows isn't it's make or break product.
Won't be an issue. By 2006 the current middle tier cards that can rock Doom 3 will be lower end, and cost next to nothing. And for those of us who like to run on older systems, well, we wouldn't run windows anyway, right?
Won't be an issue. By 2006 the current middle tier cards that can rock Doom 3 will be lower end, and cost next to nothing. And for those of us who like to run on older systems, well, we wouldn't run windows anyway, right?
This seems less like a technology article and more like an advertisement for Hartmut Neven himself. Yes, he's built a 'google for images'... But how does it perform? How exactly is it 'ingenious'? What sets his project apart from the handful of people at almost every University with a Computer Vision research department that is tackling the problem. The problem of matching images is well known, and very difficult to solve. Even in my grad school (BU), which has a small number of computer vision grad students, there are two different research projects on this very topic.
The point is though, if you're going to get all these addons and crap to make Windows actually useable why not just use Linux or BSD?
In my case, I run Adobe and Macromedia products, and play games. Plus I develop apps for a living, and Linux isn't quite a honeypot of cash for apps, yet.
Quite honestly the process one has to go through to make XP 'usable' is quick and painless. I run a linux box for my home server, and my Masters thesis involved linux kernel development, so I definitely value the OS. But when it comes to desktop it doesn't make sense, yet. In the desktop arena Linux doesn't give me anything that justifies the sacrifices I would have to make.
When I asked EyeTV why it did not take advantage of the hardware acceleration included in the graphics cards installed in modern Macs, they explained that Apple has not made those interfaces easily accessible to third party developers. Enabling hardware acceleration is thus not likely to be in the cards for EyeTV's software in the near future.
What exactly does this mean? Does OSX not export an API for 3rd party software to leverage video card's hardware?
If you run app in linux, the app attempts to write to/root, and faults on protection error, is your response "gosh linux sucks!!!".
Apps that don't run do so because they are shoddily programmed. The user protection concept has been around since NT4, maybe it's time we ask developers to actually follow secure coding practices?
At the very least all the apps I run work as expected. Office, Mozilla, Visual Studio, Nero, Adobe products, Macromedia products, etc... Those that don't work should get their acts together, because Longhorn defaults to Limited User (finally!).
Rank parent up. Execution of arbitrary code is no more dangerous in IE or Mozilla. Run either browser as Administrator and your are toast. Run as Limited user, and limit the damage to your just the browser process (IE or Mozilla).
Actually, a buffer overflow can result in the execution of arbitrary code. I'm confident in asserting that all IE6 vulnerabilities need IE to be executing in Administrator context to affect the OS, although it would be instructional to be proven wrong. Given this fact, a buffer overflow in Mozilla as Administrator threatens the OS just as much as an IE vulnerability.
Moral of the story: run Mozilla for the features, run as Limited user to be truly secure.
Yeah it totally sucks. They chain us to our desks and make us eat left over Windows ME CDs.:P
Sometimes I wish all the people who hate M$ this badly would interview for the company -- not to work there (although they'd have to pretend like they wanted to), but to get a tour of campus, have a look inside, and see how things really work. Once you sign the NDA they are pretty liberal with what they show you (development wise). Seeing as the people here are so smart, they'd definitely get the flyback to Seattle.;) The place is nowhere near perfect, but damn it's amazing the things people come up with when guessing at what happens behind closed doors.
Not too surprising, since our intranet apps often use tons IE only features. You can actually do some pretty nifty stuff in IE w/ XML/XSL, Javascript and DHTML. But I'll be damned if it doesn't break every standard in the book.:(
Fascinating stats. Add me to the % that uses Mozilla.:}
Slashdot Mirror
That's too bad! :( I actually considered coding something like this once, and came to the conclusion that the most feasible implementation would be slow (screen capture each app, resize, hide all windows, show images). How does OSX achieve the effect? I'm assuming their GUI system has built in capabilities for scaling of application windows.
'Just what we want for the kernel of a server OS'?
Avalon is a GUI engine, and has nothing to do with the kernel. As that other slashdot article clearly stated (and anyone who does a little research on the Longhorn beta would know), for those systems lacking powerful video cards, Longhorn will look and behave like Windows XP.
The newer versions of VMWare Workstation is supposed to support pass through OpenGL and DirectX, and Avalon runs on DirectX if I'm not mistaken.
If you look at their APIs, they have been getting cleaner and more consistent in the past few years. Just look at their .NET Foundation classes. The Win32 API is an abomination, I would welcome an overhaul.
Do a google search on Entbloess, TopDesk, or WinPlosion. All supposed XP clones of Expose.
As much as you wish this were true, the facts say differently. During his five years, MS profits increased by more than 60%. I shouldn't even need to point out how they've branched out into many new fields under his watch. Doesn't look to me like 'treading water'. If anything, he's positioning MS so that Windows isn't it's make or break product.
This article is dead wrong, and anyone who actually has used the beta version of Longhorn could tell you.
t icleID=38925&DisplayTab=Article
This article actually has a hands on review of the graphics subsystem.
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?Ar
Won't be an issue. By 2006 the current middle tier cards that can rock Doom 3 will be lower end, and cost next to nothing. And for those of us who like to run on older systems, well, we wouldn't run windows anyway, right?
LOL... wrong story.
Won't be an issue. By 2006 the current middle tier cards that can rock Doom 3 will be lower end, and cost next to nothing. And for those of us who like to run on older systems, well, we wouldn't run windows anyway, right?
Where's the list of features in this new version? Or should I just be excited that it's a higher number?
This seems less like a technology article and more like an advertisement for Hartmut Neven himself. Yes, he's built a 'google for images'... But how does it perform? How exactly is it 'ingenious'? What sets his project apart from the handful of people at almost every University with a Computer Vision research department that is tackling the problem. The problem of matching images is well known, and very difficult to solve. Even in my grad school (BU), which has a small number of computer vision grad students, there are two different research projects on this very topic.
The point is though, if you're going to get all these addons and crap to make Windows actually useable why not just use Linux or BSD?
In my case, I run Adobe and Macromedia products, and play games. Plus I develop apps for a living, and Linux isn't quite a honeypot of cash for apps, yet.
Quite honestly the process one has to go through to make XP 'usable' is quick and painless. I run a linux box for my home server, and my Masters thesis involved linux kernel development, so I definitely value the OS. But when it comes to desktop it doesn't make sense, yet. In the desktop arena Linux doesn't give me anything that justifies the sacrifices I would have to make.
No developement tools
Excluding things like gcc, which run under cygwin?
one desktop
Granted this is missing from the OS, but there are plenty of add-ons for that. This one is freeware: Virtual Desktop Toolbar
totally exploited every 8 seconds
uhm.. yeah
the kernel isn't that stable
I have yet to see the kernel crash in XP SP2 outside of hardware failure, which also causes linux to crash.
you can't restart the desktop without rebooting
Do you mean other than logging off and on, or killing explorer.exe in task manager?
Security by obscurity is no security at all.
how many megapixels does the hubble have?
When I asked EyeTV why it did not take advantage of the hardware acceleration included in the graphics cards installed in modern Macs, they explained that Apple has not made those interfaces easily accessible to third party developers. Enabling hardware acceleration is thus not likely to be in the cards for EyeTV's software in the near future.
What exactly does this mean? Does OSX not export an API for 3rd party software to leverage video card's hardware?
This has less to do with coding and more to do with your instal system.
This makes no sense to me, please explain.
Problem with XP or problem with the software?
/root, and faults on protection error, is your response "gosh linux sucks!!!".
If you run app in linux, the app attempts to write to
Apps that don't run do so because they are shoddily programmed. The user protection concept has been around since NT4, maybe it's time we ask developers to actually follow secure coding practices?
At the very least all the apps I run work as expected. Office, Mozilla, Visual Studio, Nero, Adobe products, Macromedia products, etc... Those that don't work should get their acts together, because Longhorn defaults to Limited User (finally!).
The vulnerability exists in any language that allows pointer manipulation. You can't bound check memory access that is dynamic at runtime.
Rank parent up. Execution of arbitrary code is no more dangerous in IE or Mozilla. Run either browser as Administrator and your are toast. Run as Limited user, and limit the damage to your just the browser process (IE or Mozilla).
Actually, a buffer overflow can result in the execution of arbitrary code. I'm confident in asserting that all IE6 vulnerabilities need IE to be executing in Administrator context to affect the OS, although it would be instructional to be proven wrong. Given this fact, a buffer overflow in Mozilla as Administrator threatens the OS just as much as an IE vulnerability.
Moral of the story: run Mozilla for the features, run as Limited user to be truly secure.
Yeah it totally sucks. They chain us to our desks and make us eat left over Windows ME CDs. :P
;) The place is nowhere near perfect, but damn it's amazing the things people come up with when guessing at what happens behind closed doors.
Sometimes I wish all the people who hate M$ this badly would interview for the company -- not to work there (although they'd have to pretend like they wanted to), but to get a tour of campus, have a look inside, and see how things really work. Once you sign the NDA they are pretty liberal with what they show you (development wise). Seeing as the people here are so smart, they'd definitely get the flyback to Seattle.
Not too surprising, since our intranet apps often use tons IE only features. You can actually do some pretty nifty stuff in IE w/ XML/XSL, Javascript and DHTML. But I'll be damned if it doesn't break every standard in the book. :(
:}
Fascinating stats. Add me to the % that uses Mozilla.
can it run Linux?