Microsoft has created an entire, successful, multibillion-dollar-a-year-profiting business model off of this!!
Give me a break.
That's why I can open a set of Windows 2.0 applications in Windows 2000 and have no problems. Yes, file formats in Office are an issue, but Microsoft is the absolute king when it comes to backwards compatability with their OS. Perfect? No. But miles ahead of the competition.
Sorry, never tried it with VBR's. I believe when I was doing some research, I found reviews that said it seemed to handle them ok, but I'm a bit hazy on those details.
How good are mp3 CD players for jog protection? The last (non-mp3) CD player I had had got pretty much the best jog/skip protection available, yet I couldn't walk down the street without it jumping, yet the MP3 player that I've got has never jumped once - that's been walking, running, cycling etc.
I've got a Sony Altrac3plus MP3 CD-Walkman D-NF610 that I use for jogging and haven't heard it skip once. Street price is $89 and it includes FM/AM/Weather/TV reception. Obiously the TV band is audio only, so don't get your hopes up.
It sounds as if the CD-drive only spins up at the beginning of each song, so I'm guessing it has enough memory to hold an entire song while playing. Also, because it rarely uses the actual CD, the battery life on this thing is unreal. I've gotten well over a month of usage on this thing with 2 double-A batteries when playing MP3's off CD. The battery life goes way down when playing normal CD's.
The Nintendo Generation has grown up. It is harder for them to get together with friends on a regular basis. They have kids, houses, and spouses. They have moved across town or out of town. To them online play is a godsend. It is easy to set aside an hour or two for a little online play with their old friends.
Wow, +5 Insightful. This is exactly how I feel. It's extremely difficult for me to get 3 or 4 of my friends in the room at the same time anymore. We're all busy. We're grown-up's now. I own a GameCube and GameCube only, but if it doesn't have online play in the next iteration, I may skip it.
I remember reading a while back that Fox had been planning a reality TV show called "The American President" I think where the audience would narrow down the field and finally pick a candidate that would be able to run with some X amount of dollars or something. It was supposed to be like a political American Idol. I'm not sure whatever happened to that idea.
I think they said it was going to air on FX or Fox Family.
Actually, those two parts would require rewriting the OS, according to Microsoft. At least, that's what they told the anti-trust commission before Felton proved them wrong.
What I'm saying is that fixing the security problems with WMP and IE doesn't require a complete rewrite of the OS.
Have you read the followup? The author claims to have exploited similar weaknesses in MS software.
Hmm, no I hadn't read the follow-up. Obviously Microsoft not following their own security policies isn't rare.:-)
I guess one could make the point that the window messaging architecture of Windows makes it more difficult to write secure applications, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. I certaintly don't agree that it requires a rewrite of the OS to fix.
I've already seen this paper before and it is bogus.
Ultimately, he is exploiting a "weakness" in Windows by sending window messages to an application that is running as a Windows Service (think deamon). Problem is, Windows Services should not create windows at all. The point of a Windows Service is to have something that is not running interactively. Norton created a very badly architected Windows application and this guy is taking advantage of it. It is not a weakness in Windows.
If you want to interact with a Windows service, you need to architect the application as such that it does not directly create Windows, but instead communicates with an application through some sort of interprocess mechanism.
As for the issue of memory protection between processes, what are you refering to? Processes cannot access each others memory, and if they do, it causes an illegal operation.
It's also something Microsoft unfortunately can't accomplish without a complete re-write of the Windows software
Hmm, when I read this, I was intrigued and excited to see what the author had in mind. He then listed the following security differences:
Windows comes with many services on by default.
DLL Hell
Mess ups with the patching system (turning VBA back on, etc.)
Pushed DRM
Trusted interdependencies
Windows Media Player, IE, etc. being bundled and tied in with the OS
Hmm, so which of these would require the "complete re-write" as the author claimed? None. Just about every service is turned off by default in newer versions of Windows. The newest version of IIS will not have to run as Administrator to work properly. DLL Hell has nothing to do with security, so I'm not sure why he went off on that tangent. Plus, the issue has been resolved nicely on WinXP for the most part. Plus, as more applications moved to managed code, it won't be an issue. Mess ups with the patching have nothing to do with the internals of the OS. DRM is another tangent he goes off on that has nothing to do with security. The interdependencies and tying together of Windows Media, etc. is just about the only point he really makes. Again though, this isn't an issue with the internals of the OS that would require a complete rewrite of the OS.
Ultimately, I have a feeling that the author knows very little about the internals of the Windows OS. Claiming that a complete rewrite is the only way to secure Windows is a laughable claim that reveals him to be quite ignorant.
Note that this says nothing about support for these products. Microsoft is going to stop distributing these products to comply with the court order, not support them. It really is two different issues.
Now, since some of these products aren't even sold anymore, the only reason this was noticed was because of the notice on MSDN, which is a place you could get these products if you had a subscription.
Actually, now that you mention "monopolistic competition", I am vaugely remember that. It's been a long while since I was in economics, so please forgive me.
Rereading my statement about competition, I phrased it horribly. What I meant was that specifically for the iPod, there is no competition in the sense that only Apple makes it. Yes, there is competition from other items within the category, but there seems to be a market perception that the iPod is absolutely and undeniably the best. Many people seem to take the view that it is in such another class that the other MP3 players aren't even worth purchasing. To some, MP3 player is synonymous with iPod.
Those things you learned in Economics class, about free markets and competition, it was all just a farce.
Actually, I think the real problem is that there is no competition for the iPod. What I mean by that is that most of economics assumes there are multiple creators/sellors of the identical item, like bananas. With iPods, since Apple is the only manufacturer of that very product, it is more difficult to apply standard rules of supply/demand.
Right. So if you choose to sell Apple products below the price they wish, then they will stop selling you their iPod's. How is that not allowing them to sell the products below a certain price? The effect is the absolute same.
Yes, you could sell them below the set price if you don't advertise it. However, if Apple finds out, they can stop selling you their product for resale if they so choose.
I'm guessing the reason they can legally set a minimum advertised price is due to copyright or trademark laws, but that's a guess.
The antitrust laws, however, give a manufacturer latitude to adopt a policy regarding a desired level of resale prices and to deal only with retailers who independently decide to follow that policy. A manufacturer also is permitted to stop dealing with a retailer who breaches the manufacturer's resale price maintenance policy. That is, the manufacturer can adopt the policy on a "take it or leave it" basis.
Nice job of leaving out the next paragraph. This is probably what the original poster was refering to.
I'm sure the huge number of sales for the GC on Black Friday weekend had to do with the Walmart deal of $79 for a Gamecube, which came with the Zelda collection. I already own a Gamecube and was feeling like I needed to get another one. Why? I don't even know.
So, your ideas about creation, free energy, the illumaniti, black helicopters, and God's love for all men could be called "theories".
Just not scientific ones.
You had me up until your last statement.
Suppose I give you some extremely complicated piece of computer equipment. Say I tell you "This equipment was created by an intelligent being." Could you prove or disprove that statement? There are many scientific ways you can prove that statement. You could use mathematics to argue that it would be impossible for the machine to have come into existence through some natural process. Whatever. But we could use the scientific method to attempt to argue the origin of the computer.
The same holds for biological life. There are scientists that hold theories that certain biological structures are too complex to have occurred through natural processes. These are theories that can be proven or disproven through the scientific method.
I'm not saying I believe them, or not. But they are testable theories. They do fall within the realm of science, even if they are or can be disproven wrong.
However, much of the "scientific" community around Slashdot has long given up on the ideas you put forth in your post. It looks like by your last few statements you have also.
The big bang in its most accepted form places us in a unique universe that didn't exist before, which brings us back to the problems mentioned before. However if we could reconcile the big bang with non-uniqueness (say finite size universe, or multiple universes or...) then I'll buy it.
So your only problem with the theory of the Big Bang is the idea of "privileged position"? As if there is some physical law that says "privileged position" doesn't exist. Do you have proof that this universe isn't unique? There is a multitude of proof (as you admit) for the Big Bang, but you won't believe it because it makes you feel too special?
I gotta say, you sure sound pretty religious about your science.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it means we're going to get a bunch of second-rate comedian wannabe's making posts on Slashdot. <g>
Give me a break.
That's why I can open a set of Windows 2.0 applications in Windows 2000 and have no problems. Yes, file formats in Office are an issue, but Microsoft is the absolute king when it comes to backwards compatability with their OS. Perfect? No. But miles ahead of the competition.
It's more like a million geeks on Slashdot making the same "millions of viewers/readers/geeks" joke at the same time.
Another winner DTB. I wonder how long the mod's will keep comign in.
You da mastah.
Sorry, never tried it with VBR's. I believe when I was doing some research, I found reviews that said it seemed to handle them ok, but I'm a bit hazy on those details.
I've got a Sony Altrac3plus MP3 CD-Walkman D-NF610 that I use for jogging and haven't heard it skip once. Street price is $89 and it includes FM/AM/Weather/TV reception. Obiously the TV band is audio only, so don't get your hopes up.
It sounds as if the CD-drive only spins up at the beginning of each song, so I'm guessing it has enough memory to hold an entire song while playing. Also, because it rarely uses the actual CD, the battery life on this thing is unreal. I've gotten well over a month of usage on this thing with 2 double-A batteries when playing MP3's off CD. The battery life goes way down when playing normal CD's.
Wow, +5 Insightful. This is exactly how I feel. It's extremely difficult for me to get 3 or 4 of my friends in the room at the same time anymore. We're all busy. We're grown-up's now. I own a GameCube and GameCube only, but if it doesn't have online play in the next iteration, I may skip it.
I remember reading a while back that Fox had been planning a reality TV show called "The American President" I think where the audience would narrow down the field and finally pick a candidate that would be able to run with some X amount of dollars or something. It was supposed to be like a political American Idol. I'm not sure whatever happened to that idea.
I think they said it was going to air on FX or Fox Family.
What I'm saying is that fixing the security problems with WMP and IE doesn't require a complete rewrite of the OS.
Hmm, no I hadn't read the follow-up. Obviously Microsoft not following their own security policies isn't rare. :-)
I guess one could make the point that the window messaging architecture of Windows makes it more difficult to write secure applications, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. I certaintly don't agree that it requires a rewrite of the OS to fix.
I've already seen this paper before and it is bogus.
Ultimately, he is exploiting a "weakness" in Windows by sending window messages to an application that is running as a Windows Service (think deamon). Problem is, Windows Services should not create windows at all. The point of a Windows Service is to have something that is not running interactively. Norton created a very badly architected Windows application and this guy is taking advantage of it. It is not a weakness in Windows.
If you want to interact with a Windows service, you need to architect the application as such that it does not directly create Windows, but instead communicates with an application through some sort of interprocess mechanism.
As for the issue of memory protection between processes, what are you refering to? Processes cannot access each others memory, and if they do, it causes an illegal operation.
From the article:
Hmm, when I read this, I was intrigued and excited to see what the author had in mind. He then listed the following security differences:
Hmm, so which of these would require the "complete re-write" as the author claimed? None. Just about every service is turned off by default in newer versions of Windows. The newest version of IIS will not have to run as Administrator to work properly. DLL Hell has nothing to do with security, so I'm not sure why he went off on that tangent. Plus, the issue has been resolved nicely on WinXP for the most part. Plus, as more applications moved to managed code, it won't be an issue. Mess ups with the patching have nothing to do with the internals of the OS. DRM is another tangent he goes off on that has nothing to do with security. The interdependencies and tying together of Windows Media, etc. is just about the only point he really makes. Again though, this isn't an issue with the internals of the OS that would require a complete rewrite of the OS.
Ultimately, I have a feeling that the author knows very little about the internals of the Windows OS. Claiming that a complete rewrite is the only way to secure Windows is a laughable claim that reveals him to be quite ignorant.
Whoa, I hadn't even heard of a SC4 under development? Who says they are developing this?
Note that this says nothing about support for these products. Microsoft is going to stop distributing these products to comply with the court order, not support them. It really is two different issues.
Now, since some of these products aren't even sold anymore, the only reason this was noticed was because of the notice on MSDN, which is a place you could get these products if you had a subscription.
Actually, now that you mention "monopolistic competition", I am vaugely remember that. It's been a long while since I was in economics, so please forgive me.
Rereading my statement about competition, I phrased it horribly. What I meant was that specifically for the iPod, there is no competition in the sense that only Apple makes it. Yes, there is competition from other items within the category, but there seems to be a market perception that the iPod is absolutely and undeniably the best. Many people seem to take the view that it is in such another class that the other MP3 players aren't even worth purchasing. To some, MP3 player is synonymous with iPod.
Actually, I think the real problem is that there is no competition for the iPod. What I mean by that is that most of economics assumes there are multiple creators/sellors of the identical item, like bananas. With iPods, since Apple is the only manufacturer of that very product, it is more difficult to apply standard rules of supply/demand.
Well... yeah. :-)
Right. So if you choose to sell Apple products below the price they wish, then they will stop selling you their iPod's. How is that not allowing them to sell the products below a certain price? The effect is the absolute same.
Apple can also choose not to do business at all with that vendor anymore. They would have to purchase their iPod's from somewhere else.
Yes, you could sell them below the set price if you don't advertise it. However, if Apple finds out, they can stop selling you their product for resale if they so choose.
I'm guessing the reason they can legally set a minimum advertised price is due to copyright or trademark laws, but that's a guess.
Nice job of leaving out the next paragraph. This is probably what the original poster was refering to.
"We're Robot Jox! We're already dead!
I'm sure the huge number of sales for the GC on Black Friday weekend had to do with the Walmart deal of $79 for a Gamecube, which came with the Zelda collection. I already own a Gamecube and was feeling like I needed to get another one. Why? I don't even know.
You had me up until your last statement.
Suppose I give you some extremely complicated piece of computer equipment. Say I tell you "This equipment was created by an intelligent being." Could you prove or disprove that statement? There are many scientific ways you can prove that statement. You could use mathematics to argue that it would be impossible for the machine to have come into existence through some natural process. Whatever. But we could use the scientific method to attempt to argue the origin of the computer.
The same holds for biological life. There are scientists that hold theories that certain biological structures are too complex to have occurred through natural processes. These are theories that can be proven or disproven through the scientific method.
I'm not saying I believe them, or not. But they are testable theories. They do fall within the realm of science, even if they are or can be disproven wrong.
However, much of the "scientific" community around Slashdot has long given up on the ideas you put forth in your post. It looks like by your last few statements you have also.
So your only problem with the theory of the Big Bang is the idea of "privileged position"? As if there is some physical law that says "privileged position" doesn't exist. Do you have proof that this universe isn't unique? There is a multitude of proof (as you admit) for the Big Bang, but you won't believe it because it makes you feel too special?
I gotta say, you sure sound pretty religious about your science.