What a silly joke!
They dont even force them to let the user remove IE or other middleware. You can only remove the icon but all the bloat still lies in there lurking. It should have stated that all middleware should be removable completely. Otherwise microsoft can have their next programs installation procedure say:
"Do you want to enable (IE or whatever) cus you cant use program X otherwise?"
Its a very lame remedy and as a punishment rather a *baaad Microsoft!*. It should atleast force them to release all protocol and document interfaces to the public ASAP. That way they wont be able to play embrace and extend as easy anymore.
If they block ports, protocols whatever its just a matter och days or weeks. Just run sharing over VPN or any other encrypted protocol. They cant block legit data so this seems lika a stupid idea. Lower the price on CDs and get over it!
But as linux is pretty stable in comparison to Windows it cant be that bad to run it on a mainframe. Sun has to jump onto the linux train to be able to compete with IBM but they dont seem happy about it.
I wonder why, is it because they are behind in emnrading linux?
Tossed the windows partition out today and i feel free. Never ever going back!
The fact alone that it is more neutral to what OS you use makes it much better that DirectX. I really hope those VB developers get an easy way to use OpenGL instead of DirectX.
It seems a little early to implement MONO in Gnome at this point me thinks. Why dont Miguel try to get a different license on the mono libraries first and then adopt it? Im not comfortable with the thought of Gnome having its nuts in the hands of intel and Microsoft iether directly or indirectly. Why dont look into other high level application language instead? Gotta be lots of alteratives like lisp?
They havent had the opportynity to see anything different because of Microsoft. Its not like they go out and buy a PC and have the chance to choose OS. A PC comes to the shop with Windows and no one ever see anything else if they are average Joes. No single big company will bet really seriuos money until they are sure not to get a knife in their back from behind. Heres hoping that the remedies from he antitrust suit will be hard and allow competition like in the HW business.
Due to the conviction of Microsoft as an abusive monopoly and the many businesses they have destroyed more suits will likely emerge. The fact that Microsoft will battle multiple fronts will probably make it easier to win a suit. When Sun, DOJ, Be and AOL togheter pull resources in different directions it will be hard to focus. This will encourage more stomped companies to file aswell. I think that this also has a good side effect, that is open source will maybe have a window of opportunity to thrive. Microsoft will have their hands full for a while now, especially if IBM and other joins the fight.
Fisrst of all, IE isnt an intrical part of windows and can be removed by for example win98lite. http://www.98lite.net/ieradicator.html I cant imagine paint, the media player or movie maker having any seriuos IO tasks either. Microsoft tried to claim that it was impossible to remove IE and it was done under the trial by an expert witness. They still clame its impossible?
The source code would reveal this both by how the apis was communicating and by the source.
Other strange things hidden in the source would probably pop up aswell.
Atleast it would either expose som serious anticompetitive practices or put an end to speculation. I vote for the first considering how they fight to keep the source hidden.
One also wonders, how much is real code and how much is landfill? All those easter eggs has to be stored somewhere on the HD?
The only way to get close to this is by hardware/OS schemes and since Microsoft seems to be the only ones really interested in this i dont think it will fly anytime soon. If windows get built in copyright protection people will go to other OSs. And even with hardware protection you can alvays intercept the signal by hardware hack and extract the music before it gets out of the preeamp. Its a loosing game they are playing and we are the ones ending up tossing coins in the slot for it.
I doo buy records if i like them after i have yanked them from the web.
Software should not be able to patent. Its far to easy to solve a problem and take patent on the problem rather than the way to solve it. One-click from Amazon is an excellent example of patenting the problem (buying with a click). I wouldnt have opposed if it had been a patent on HOW to make one-klick working. Software is to fluid to be mesured up by a patent office because of the extremaly many ways to solve a specific task. Many of those ways fall under patent that hasnt anything with the patent at all, they just solve a problem in one of many ways possible.
I say, if they still want software patents then narrow them down so specific that they only patent real code and no just air like BTs patent on hyperlinks (or what you can call it).
A strange but maybe working idea would be memory that you could writeprotect. I dunno if this has been done yet but it would make servers damn hard to hack if you could specify what memory can be written and not by hardware settings. Like a separate chip thats not interfaced to the processor but sits between memory and cpu and has an own interface for settings. A chip that just blatantly says no when anything other than read are passed thru to that memory adress. It should be very hard to brake the apps that was protected.
Strange idea, strange and probably silly....
From the article:
"So our opportunity is not to replace Microsoft on the PC. If you've got a perfectly good working PC, why you would go through the angst of replacing it?".
Well, last i checked Windows XP is very expensive comparing to hardware and dont seem to be getting cheaper soon. In sweden atleast Windows XP home cost 262$ and Windows XP Pro 376$. Compare that to a normal PC for 1000$ (without windows) and it seems that the biggest pricecut possible is by not having Windows on it.
Sadly most people dont know about this because they pay for windows without knowing about it when its included in the price of the computer.
Then we have the issue of freedom. Windows forces me in directions i never intended to go (MSN, passport and good only knows what next).
Windows is good enough because most people doesnt have a clue of whats possible to do with a computer. They think that windows is state of the art because its biggest on the market.
Boy are they wrong, now if someone with visions could take the possibilities and run with them. Linux would for instance benefit on the desktop if there was some level of abstraction like in macintosh (not dunbed down like in windows)
Trillian is in my eyes much better than Aim, MSN, ICQ and all else i have used. Aol should ancourage them instead of letting the ICQ team get away with crap and constant beta limbo. Do as with Winamp, hold em under their wings but dont kill em off. Some day they will need good programmers as the ones developing trillian.
-If you Chooke a Smurf, what colour does its face turn into?
I dont think MS can accomplish this with their current codebase. Its far to bloated and hardware dependant.
The level of hardware abstraction that MS would be forced to do to keep backward compability is astonishing. On linux that has a slick small kernel its hard enough but think of the size of MS "kernel"? This would most likely make their OS significantly slower than *nix and others. A complete rewrite of the NT kernel would be a hefty task and is not likely in the near future.
To most PHBs this would be considered big news that Microsoft intentionally tried to alter an online poll. Just because "we" know how they have behaived badly before doesnt meen that the PHBs do. Most of them are just aware of what the MS salesperson tells them when he visit their company.
No sane person would let MS into their company if the knew what they wore locking themswlves into and just how low MS seems to be willing to go in their marketing and sales efforts.
Im not biased, just well informed after 20 years in computers.
That way i dont have to worry about leakage from othar than my memory all the time. Residues inside the pipes may be able to fry your cpu over time aswell. Besides, with cpus running at 2.2 Mhz, isnt the biggest speedblock right now the pipe between the cpu and the periferals? No big gain to have a cpu that runs circles around the mem/hd/internet connection is it?
Correct me if im wrong but isnt this going to make the programs bigger and heavier than before? I sure hope they will make it possible to make for example just a calculation in 64 bit and the rest in 32 bit instead of wasting bits for no reason.
Just thinking out loud =)
Slashdot Mirror
What a silly joke! They dont even force them to let the user remove IE or other middleware. You can only remove the icon but all the bloat still lies in there lurking. It should have stated that all middleware should be removable completely. Otherwise microsoft can have their next programs installation procedure say: "Do you want to enable (IE or whatever) cus you cant use program X otherwise?" Its a very lame remedy and as a punishment rather a *baaad Microsoft!*. It should atleast force them to release all protocol and document interfaces to the public ASAP. That way they wont be able to play embrace and extend as easy anymore.
If they block ports, protocols whatever its just a matter och days or weeks. Just run sharing over VPN or any other encrypted protocol. They cant block legit data so this seems lika a stupid idea. Lower the price on CDs and get over it!
But as linux is pretty stable in comparison to Windows it cant be that bad to run it on a mainframe. Sun has to jump onto the linux train to be able to compete with IBM but they dont seem happy about it.
I wonder why, is it because they are behind in emnrading linux?
Tossed the windows partition out today and i feel free. Never ever going back!
The fact alone that it is more neutral to what OS you use makes it much better that DirectX. I really hope those VB developers get an easy way to use OpenGL instead of DirectX.
It seems a little early to implement MONO in Gnome at this point me thinks. Why dont Miguel try to get a different license on the mono libraries first and then adopt it? Im not comfortable with the thought of Gnome having its nuts in the hands of intel and Microsoft iether directly or indirectly. Why dont look into other high level application language instead? Gotta be lots of alteratives like lisp?
They havent had the opportynity to see anything different because of Microsoft. Its not like they go out and buy a PC and have the chance to choose OS. A PC comes to the shop with Windows and no one ever see anything else if they are average Joes. No single big company will bet really seriuos money until they are sure not to get a knife in their back from behind. Heres hoping that the remedies from he antitrust suit will be hard and allow competition like in the HW business.
Due to the conviction of Microsoft as an abusive monopoly and the many businesses they have destroyed more suits will likely emerge. The fact that Microsoft will battle multiple fronts will probably make it easier to win a suit. When Sun, DOJ, Be and AOL togheter pull resources in different directions it will be hard to focus. This will encourage more stomped companies to file aswell. I think that this also has a good side effect, that is open source will maybe have a window of opportunity to thrive. Microsoft will have their hands full for a while now, especially if IBM and other joins the fight.
May come in handy when the phone bugger out in the middle of a conversation with the lady.
Really, when nokia, ericsson and sony have problems keeping the phones alive without boot, how is MS supposed to manage it?
Fisrst of all, IE isnt an intrical part of windows and can be removed by for example win98lite. http://www.98lite.net/ieradicator.html I cant imagine paint, the media player or movie maker having any seriuos IO tasks either. Microsoft tried to claim that it was impossible to remove IE and it was done under the trial by an expert witness. They still clame its impossible? The source code would reveal this both by how the apis was communicating and by the source. Other strange things hidden in the source would probably pop up aswell. Atleast it would either expose som serious anticompetitive practices or put an end to speculation. I vote for the first considering how they fight to keep the source hidden. One also wonders, how much is real code and how much is landfill? All those easter eggs has to be stored somewhere on the HD?
The only way to get close to this is by hardware/OS schemes and since Microsoft seems to be the only ones really interested in this i dont think it will fly anytime soon. If windows get built in copyright protection people will go to other OSs. And even with hardware protection you can alvays intercept the signal by hardware hack and extract the music before it gets out of the preeamp. Its a loosing game they are playing and we are the ones ending up tossing coins in the slot for it. I doo buy records if i like them after i have yanked them from the web.
Software should not be able to patent. Its far to easy to solve a problem and take patent on the problem rather than the way to solve it. One-click from Amazon is an excellent example of patenting the problem (buying with a click). I wouldnt have opposed if it had been a patent on HOW to make one-klick working. Software is to fluid to be mesured up by a patent office because of the extremaly many ways to solve a specific task. Many of those ways fall under patent that hasnt anything with the patent at all, they just solve a problem in one of many ways possible.
I say, if they still want software patents then narrow them down so specific that they only patent real code and no just air like BTs patent on hyperlinks (or what you can call it).
A strange but maybe working idea would be memory that you could writeprotect. I dunno if this has been done yet but it would make servers damn hard to hack if you could specify what memory can be written and not by hardware settings. Like a separate chip thats not interfaced to the processor but sits between memory and cpu and has an own interface for settings. A chip that just blatantly says no when anything other than read are passed thru to that memory adress. It should be very hard to brake the apps that was protected. Strange idea, strange and probably silly....
From the article: "So our opportunity is not to replace Microsoft on the PC. If you've got a perfectly good working PC, why you would go through the angst of replacing it?". Well, last i checked Windows XP is very expensive comparing to hardware and dont seem to be getting cheaper soon. In sweden atleast Windows XP home cost 262$ and Windows XP Pro 376$. Compare that to a normal PC for 1000$ (without windows) and it seems that the biggest pricecut possible is by not having Windows on it. Sadly most people dont know about this because they pay for windows without knowing about it when its included in the price of the computer. Then we have the issue of freedom. Windows forces me in directions i never intended to go (MSN, passport and good only knows what next). Windows is good enough because most people doesnt have a clue of whats possible to do with a computer. They think that windows is state of the art because its biggest on the market. Boy are they wrong, now if someone with visions could take the possibilities and run with them. Linux would for instance benefit on the desktop if there was some level of abstraction like in macintosh (not dunbed down like in windows)
Trillian is in my eyes much better than Aim, MSN, ICQ and all else i have used. Aol should ancourage them instead of letting the ICQ team get away with crap and constant beta limbo. Do as with Winamp, hold em under their wings but dont kill em off. Some day they will need good programmers as the ones developing trillian. -If you Chooke a Smurf, what colour does its face turn into?
I dont think MS can accomplish this with their current codebase. Its far to bloated and hardware dependant. The level of hardware abstraction that MS would be forced to do to keep backward compability is astonishing. On linux that has a slick small kernel its hard enough but think of the size of MS "kernel"? This would most likely make their OS significantly slower than *nix and others. A complete rewrite of the NT kernel would be a hefty task and is not likely in the near future.
To most PHBs this would be considered big news that Microsoft intentionally tried to alter an online poll. Just because "we" know how they have behaived badly before doesnt meen that the PHBs do. Most of them are just aware of what the MS salesperson tells them when he visit their company. No sane person would let MS into their company if the knew what they wore locking themswlves into and just how low MS seems to be willing to go in their marketing and sales efforts. Im not biased, just well informed after 20 years in computers.
That way i dont have to worry about leakage from othar than my memory all the time. Residues inside the pipes may be able to fry your cpu over time aswell. Besides, with cpus running at 2.2 Mhz, isnt the biggest speedblock right now the pipe between the cpu and the periferals? No big gain to have a cpu that runs circles around the mem/hd/internet connection is it?
Correct me if im wrong but isnt this going to make the programs bigger and heavier than before? I sure hope they will make it possible to make for example just a calculation in 64 bit and the rest in 32 bit instead of wasting bits for no reason. Just thinking out loud =)