"But pressing the winkey, start typing a name or command and pressing enter to launch about anything you can think of in Win7 is "easy" in my book."
If you know exactly what app you want yes, but its really not any better than opening up a terminal window and writing the app name.
Windows 7 is not any easier to use for a newbie than windows 3.11. Ive been along since Windows 3.11 and i think some things are really much harder to do in Windows 7. Its different, not better.
"Yes there are shitloads of configuration options but for most users Win7 is ready to go right out of the box. They've done a really good job with that."
Thats not my perception, most users come to me and want a boatload of help getting even basic stuff working as they are used to them. Newbies seems most put off by the dice arranged interface.
I dont think Windows 7 is any better than Windows Vista. Marginally faster compared to Vista but being faster than Vista is like winning special olympics, youre still a retard.
Microsoft has no connection whatsoever with their users and thats where their real problem lies. Their users wants their OS to run their applications as good as possible and make managing the computer easy. Microsoft wants the OS to be the users primary application. Jumping up and down in your users face screaming for attention when their primary goal is using their apps arent productive.
Until Microsofts leadership realizes their customers are their end users Windows will continue to suck as bad as ever.
If they break into the car/house without doing any damage its a petty crime. A crime yes, but a minor one. Not something you extradite people for with anti terrorism laws exactly.
Web servers are not especially important and they tend to go down for various reasons from time to time without the world bursting into flames. I think hacking into a web server without destroying anything is a very petty crime. Using ill gotten information for further crimes is bad but the actual hacking, not so much.
As for nazis, give it a rest. Playing the nazi card in a discussion about extradiction devalues it beyond usability.
This constant effort in changing our language is frustrating.
When you steal something you deprive the previous owner of their copy.
Making a copy is an offense but since it doesnt deprive the real owner of their copy its a very minor offense, especially when done without economic interest and for profit.
Microsofts very creative way of handling security has been known for a long time. Instead of fixing the bugs they go for the statistics. By downplaying any security issue until openly proven wrong and rate vulnerabilities as low as possible the statistics look much better.
Another smart move was UAC that puts all the blame on the user but doesnt fix the underlying security issues.
Comparing only Windows to Linux + All applications is also very deceptive, especially with the practices above in mind.
The sad thing is, it works. People tend to think Microsoft has improved their security when infact Windows 7 in many cases are worse than than its predecessor. If you lie enough times with a straight face stupid cheep will think its true.
Most longer games tend to artificially extend gameplay by long transports and repetitive tasks. The few that has longer gameplay by really introducing new tasks are really good and worth the time.
I wouldnt want a bad movie be extented over three hours either. If the game suck after a short while, maybe it really isnt that good?
Any EA executives wet dream must be to chop good games up into countless expansions so it can be sold over and over.
"It's been mentioned several times that the network devices were configured to not store their configs in NVRAM or to wipe the configs if password recovery was used."
Thats how its supposed to work. Atleast from what they tought me at Cisco CCNA. Having a password reset as the only step between an attacker and the configs (including passwords etc in it) is from a security perspective pretty lame.
"There are established protocols for preventing this situation for coming up in the first place."
Call me an idiot all you want. The places that have those established protocols are few and far between. The problem is the suits that wants you to secure stuff but at the same time wants to be able to do whatever falls into their head at the moment.
Im a sysadmin and the lesson for me is, dont give a shit about security, protocol or third party victims in case of security breach. If some clueless middle manager asks me for the passwords to some very sensitive database, i will give them to him no matter what. For all i care he can sell them on Ebay. The only thing i will care about hence forth is getting a written order or atleast having a witness of me handing it over. I wont spend time in jail to prevent some idiot boss from making bad mistakes. Especially if i have to take crap like Terry for keeping security tight.
"You can't really equate software and music/movies."
Thats where you're wrong, software do equate music, movies and photos etc. When you buy software, you get a bunch of bits with no promise that it will do anything at all. The only thing it has to do is perform roughly as stated in the brochures and its advertising laws that stands between you and a pile of worthless ones and zeroes, not copyright.
A new form of copyright with mandatory guaranties from the manufacturers would differentiate software from media but today, its exactly the same.
Imagine for a second Google had built their infrastructure on Windows or Unix. How would the cost of operations scale? Investments in deploying an extra 5000 servers with licenses? No go?
Open source was what made Google possible. The only real alternative had been them coding their own ecosystem from scratch.
Google proves open source, if used right, can be very beneficial to a company on the intertubes. Same goes for most other large services. Cost prohibits anything else being used than open source because closed source only scales one way, costs rise with the size of the deployment.
I think a large part of the "cognitive dissonance" stems from the fact that you get no guaranties whatsoever that said software will work. I can only talk for myself but i have a very hard time persuading myself pony up for something that may or may not work and where the seller takes no responsibility of the goods.
The industry put themselves in this situation when they used copyrights to protect their goods (software is traded as photos, movies or books, not real products). The upside, no guaranties, is offset by the backside, nobody thinks your product is worth the money.
All they do nowadays is kicking in open doors. They wont dare taking on things like israeli lobbyism, afganistan, Iran, irak, palestine, south america, US foreign policy or anything even remotely sensitive. The greed that has put american factories in China making countless americans out of work just for very shortsighted profits isnt something i expect them to cover either.
Poking fun at radical muslims are about as courageous as telling a redneck nascar sucks and that jesus blows Hulk Hogan every night.
The ISPs have it all backwards, presumably with full knowledge of the real problem. The customer pays for a connection to the internet. The customer then uses it to access popular services, like Youtube or Facebook or any other of this months fad.
Many ISP has vastly oversold their capacity to their customers and engaged in price fights that has made internet access well below what they should cost. They know its going to be a cold day in hell before the customers agree on a big price hike this late in the game so they try to wring money out of the popular services the customers use their bandwidth on.
Since the ISPs sell access to the internet they have nothing, absolutely nothing they can demand from services on the internet. They made this mess by charging to little for all to much bandwidth, well, sucks to be wrong dont it?
The problem is there is nothing Google really needs at Palm. The patents would just be used for defense against really crappy patents that should never have been issued in the first place to Apple. As for Android, i personally prefer it over both iPhone, Symbian and WebOS. Palm wouldnt bring anything to the table.
Nokia on the other hand, they would benefit greatly.
Something must have snapped inside Apples management. The level of control they want is insane and not encouraging for customers. Its bad enough for consumer devices but imagine decisions like this wreaking havoc inside corporations using Apples products.
One day your whole fleet of salespeople run some application on their iPhones, the next day those are forbidden by Apple because some sudden decision about tightening control even further.
Luckily there are much better alternatives thats not ran by rampant schizofrenic mono depressive controlfreaks.
Further space exploration is hingent on better orbital lifters than what we have today. The possibilies are still endless once we get cheaper ways to get up into space. The biggest hindrance today is cost versus benefit, not lack of applications once we are in space.
My prediction is that China will beat the US both on further development and cost of space exploration, mostly because of their practical nature.
I was going to write that just by reading the ingress. The US wanted the world to adopt capitalism and now it comes back and bites them hard once the world starts understanding it and how to manipulate it.
Im not so sure people are prepared to pay premium money or even any money for ad-infested zeros and ones. Everyone will compare the ipad with the internet and if the news on the ipad arent substantially better than on the internet nobody will pay.
There should be a standard way of getting a green light on a new invention without having to take out a patent on it. A record with notarius publicus that i came up with the idea myself, and making it impossible for anyone else taking out a patent on the same or adjecent ideas. A patent is all to expensive, especially for 99% of all software related inventions thats really just a knowledgeable persons solution to a given problem.
The breach you talk about used vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer from Microsoft. If those people had used Google Chrome instead they wouldnt have been hacked. Or better yet, if they had used Google Chrome on a good Linux distribution like Redhat with SE Linux turned on.
Slashdot Mirror
n/t
"But pressing the winkey, start typing a name or command and pressing enter to launch about anything you can think of in Win7 is "easy" in my book."
If you know exactly what app you want yes, but its really not any better than opening up a terminal window and writing the app name.
Windows 7 is not any easier to use for a newbie than windows 3.11. Ive been along since Windows 3.11 and i think some things are really much harder to do in Windows 7. Its different, not better.
"Yes there are shitloads of configuration options but for most users Win7 is ready to go right out of the box. They've done a really good job with that."
Thats not my perception, most users come to me and want a boatload of help getting even basic stuff working as they are used to them. Newbies seems most put off by the dice arranged interface.
I dont think Windows 7 is any better than Windows Vista. Marginally faster compared to Vista but being faster than Vista is like winning special olympics, youre still a retard.
Microsoft has no connection whatsoever with their users and thats where their real problem lies. Their users wants their OS to run their applications as good as possible and make managing the computer easy. Microsoft wants the OS to be the users primary application. Jumping up and down in your users face screaming for attention when their primary goal is using their apps arent productive.
Until Microsofts leadership realizes their customers are their end users Windows will continue to suck as bad as ever.
If they break into the car/house without doing any damage its a petty crime. A crime yes, but a minor one. Not something you extradite people for with anti terrorism laws exactly.
Web servers are not especially important and they tend to go down for various reasons from time to time without the world bursting into flames. I think hacking into a web server without destroying anything is a very petty crime. Using ill gotten information for further crimes is bad but the actual hacking, not so much.
As for nazis, give it a rest. Playing the nazi card in a discussion about extradiction devalues it beyond usability.
This constant effort in changing our language is frustrating.
When you steal something you deprive the previous owner of their copy.
Making a copy is an offense but since it doesnt deprive the real owner of their copy its a very minor offense, especially when done without economic interest and for profit.
Microsofts very creative way of handling security has been known for a long time. Instead of fixing the bugs they go for the statistics. By downplaying any security issue until openly proven wrong and rate vulnerabilities as low as possible the statistics look much better.
Another smart move was UAC that puts all the blame on the user but doesnt fix the underlying security issues.
Comparing only Windows to Linux + All applications is also very deceptive, especially with the practices above in mind.
The sad thing is, it works. People tend to think Microsoft has improved their security when infact Windows 7 in many cases are worse than than its predecessor. If you lie enough times with a straight face stupid cheep will think its true.
Most longer games tend to artificially extend gameplay by long transports and repetitive tasks. The few that has longer gameplay by really introducing new tasks are really good and worth the time.
I wouldnt want a bad movie be extented over three hours either. If the game suck after a short while, maybe it really isnt that good?
Any EA executives wet dream must be to chop good games up into countless expansions so it can be sold over and over.
"It's been mentioned several times that the network devices were configured to not store their configs in NVRAM or to wipe the configs if password recovery was used."
Thats how its supposed to work. Atleast from what they tought me at Cisco CCNA. Having a password reset as the only step between an attacker and the configs (including passwords etc in it) is from a security perspective pretty lame.
"There are established protocols for preventing this situation for coming up in the first place."
Call me an idiot all you want. The places that have those established protocols are few and far between.
The problem is the suits that wants you to secure stuff but at the same time wants to be able to do whatever falls into their head at the moment.
Im a sysadmin and the lesson for me is, dont give a shit about security, protocol or third party victims in case of security breach. If some clueless middle manager asks me for the passwords to some very sensitive database, i will give them to him no matter what. For all i care he can sell them on Ebay. The only thing i will care about hence forth is getting a written order or atleast having a witness of me handing it over. I wont spend time in jail to prevent some idiot boss from making bad mistakes. Especially if i have to take crap like Terry for keeping security tight.
"You can't really equate software and music/movies."
Thats where you're wrong, software do equate music, movies and photos etc. When you buy software, you get a bunch of bits with no promise that it will do anything at all. The only thing it has to do is perform roughly as stated in the brochures and its advertising laws that stands between you and a pile of worthless ones and zeroes, not copyright.
A new form of copyright with mandatory guaranties from the manufacturers would differentiate software from media but today, its exactly the same.
Imagine for a second Google had built their infrastructure on Windows or Unix. How would the cost of operations scale? Investments in deploying an extra 5000 servers with licenses? No go?
Open source was what made Google possible. The only real alternative had been them coding their own ecosystem from scratch.
Google proves open source, if used right, can be very beneficial to a company on the intertubes. Same goes for most other large services. Cost prohibits anything else being used than open source because closed source only scales one way, costs rise with the size of the deployment.
I think a large part of the "cognitive dissonance" stems from the fact that you get no guaranties whatsoever that said software will work. I can only talk for myself but i have a very hard time persuading myself pony up for something that may or may not work and where the seller takes no responsibility of the goods.
The industry put themselves in this situation when they used copyrights to protect their goods (software is traded as photos, movies or books, not real products). The upside, no guaranties, is offset by the backside, nobody thinks your product is worth the money.
All they do nowadays is kicking in open doors. They wont dare taking on things like israeli lobbyism, afganistan, Iran, irak, palestine, south america, US foreign policy or anything even remotely sensitive. The greed that has put american factories in China making countless americans out of work just for very shortsighted profits isnt something i expect them to cover either.
Poking fun at radical muslims are about as courageous as telling a redneck nascar sucks and that jesus blows Hulk Hogan every night.
The ISPs have it all backwards, presumably with full knowledge of the real problem. The customer pays for a connection to the internet. The customer then uses it to access popular services, like Youtube or Facebook or any other of this months fad.
Many ISP has vastly oversold their capacity to their customers and engaged in price fights that has made internet access well below what they should cost. They know its going to be a cold day in hell before the customers agree on a big price hike this late in the game so they try to wring money out of the popular services the customers use their bandwidth on.
Since the ISPs sell access to the internet they have nothing, absolutely nothing they can demand from services on the internet. They made this mess by charging to little for all to much bandwidth, well, sucks to be wrong dont it?
The problem is there is nothing Google really needs at Palm. The patents would just be used for defense against really crappy patents that should never have been issued in the first place to Apple. As for Android, i personally prefer it over both iPhone, Symbian and WebOS. Palm wouldnt bring anything to the table.
Nokia on the other hand, they would benefit greatly.
Something must have snapped inside Apples management. The level of control they want is insane and not encouraging for customers. Its bad enough for consumer devices but imagine decisions like this wreaking havoc inside corporations using Apples products.
One day your whole fleet of salespeople run some application on their iPhones, the next day those are forbidden by Apple because some sudden decision about tightening control even further.
Luckily there are much better alternatives thats not ran by rampant schizofrenic mono depressive controlfreaks.
Further space exploration is hingent on better orbital lifters than what we have today. The possibilies are still endless once we get cheaper ways to get up into space. The biggest hindrance today is cost versus benefit, not lack of applications once we are in space.
My prediction is that China will beat the US both on further development and cost of space exploration, mostly because of their practical nature.
The moment US decided to go for the shuttle the game was over. Form over function is ok for household gadgets but not for space exploration.
The US had did have the best launch system and just tossed it aside because it was more cool with a rocket with a bolted on hip looking spacecraft.
I was going to write that just by reading the ingress. The US wanted the world to adopt capitalism and now it comes back and bites them hard once the world starts understanding it and how to manipulate it.
Im not so sure people are prepared to pay premium money or even any money for ad-infested zeros and ones. Everyone will compare the ipad with the internet and if the news on the ipad arent substantially better than on the internet nobody will pay.
"Today Venezuela was wiped off the planet by US nukes"
"In other news, Venezuela was labaled as non compliant to nuclear treaties ten minutes ago"
There should be a standard way of getting a green light on a new invention without having to take out a patent on it. A record with notarius publicus that i came up with the idea myself, and making it impossible for anyone else taking out a patent on the same or adjecent ideas. A patent is all to expensive, especially for 99% of all software related inventions thats really just a knowledgeable persons solution to a given problem.
The breach you talk about used vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer from Microsoft. If those people had used Google Chrome instead they wouldnt have been hacked. Or better yet, if they had used Google Chrome on a good Linux distribution like Redhat with SE Linux turned on.