Are these for real?
Yes. Microsoft has acknowledged the authenticity of these documents. Halloween I, II, III and VII are real; [VII is the one I cited.]
M$ has openly acknowledged that several of them are, in fact, true leaks of M$ memos. I don't have a specific link for that document but someone probably does - ESR says it is and I think it's too boring and buzzowrd compliant to be fake. But feel free to show us as wrong.
What I find very strange about all this is M$ admits it's "anti-Linux/OSS/GPL" FUD isn't working after surveying people about their views in the Halloween VII memo.
What message DID resonate with IT managers? The possibility of being sued for Linux/OSS patent voilations.
"Linux patent violations/risk of being sued" struck a chord with US and Swedish respondents. Seventy-four percent (74%) of Americans and 82% of Swedes stated that the risk of being sued over Linux patent violations made them feel less favorable towards Linux. This was the only message that had a strong impact with any audience.
Hmmm... the only thing that might work is very public lawsuits and threats about patent voilations and what begins to happen?
But M$ would never actually bribe another company to sue (and threaten to sue) the companies that represent the biggest threats to them just as a marketing ploy would they?
This was the only message that had a strong impact with any audience.
Anyhow, I disagree with your assertion that consoles always outstrip the current offerings of computers. In the past that might have been true some of the time. It certainly wasn't true in 1983 when the C64 was the best game machine out there.
Um... 1983? Okay - my assertion might not have been valid 20 years ago. But consoles weren't in competition with computers 20 years ago because personal computers were exotic and rare. (I was playing on an Apple][!)
What I'm saying is the consoles survive by applying specialized hardware towards a certain goal (playing games) and do it at a lower price. Microsoft could not have competed with Sony at the PS2s roll-out because packaging 2 year-old computer hardware into a box and selling it at a loss would NOT have created a box that would have competed in performance with the Playstation. M$ was only able to compete because they entered the market well after the rising tide of general computing power floated general computing power into the range of specialized hardware.
If Sony makes their stated target goal of 1 trillion FPU operations with the PS3 processor it will outstrip ANYTHING that M$ can field for another few years after the PS3 rollout (if they depending on general computing hardware) let alone field at the several hundred dollar price. M$ can continue they schedule of letting general computer power rise to the level of specialized hardware and then repackage it for the masses, but it's not working out very well for them now and it probably won't into the future.
How many XBoxes are they going to sell when the PS3 is about to ship?
They don't want to alert Microsoft to what is going on. Everyone says that it would be impossible to release a PS3 this quickly, but what about an XBox2? By using what is basically commodity hardware again MS can develop and release a backwards compatible followup to the XBox with relatively little effort.
The problem for M$ is that consoles always outstrip the current offerings by computers - that's how they survive. The newest console offers you things you can't do on your computer yet - and for a couple hundred dollars. If the PS3 performs anywhere close to the lofty goals they said they were shooting for then M$ has a real problem. The only way to compete with the PS3 (and then Nintendos new box) would be to design their own cutting edge hardware - but the XBox is just a repackaged PC. To repeat their (limited) success they would need to package a dual Opteron system with the newest NVidia system into a box for US$300. The original XBox was only able to compete in hardware because it came out several years after the PS2 shipped - in that gap the PCs had caught up to the consoles - as they always do.
M$ is not a hardware company and they will be hardpressed to EVER ship a box within a couple of years of a console that competes with the newest consoles without becoming a hardware developer.
Q: How is NASA like a walrus? A: Their both looking for a tight seal.
Q: What did the school teacher leave as a final present for her students? A: A big blown-up picture of herself.
The school teacher finally got to take her dream vacation - all over Florida.
Damn rec.humor was bad then - people would bust in with the "What does NASA stand for?" joke like it was new for months after that like it was new when they would finally hear it. Damn.
I think rec.humor.funny split off about that time... coincidence?
=tkk
PS Why does everyone whose repeating these jokes have/. #s less than 100K? Cause we're old.
when they changed Windows NT 5.0 to Windows 2000 - hoping to ditch all the bad news
Actually I think this was also the first real push made by M$ to go to leased software.
Naming your Word Processor or Office Suite after the year makes no sense at all unless you plan to release a new one every year like they do cars. They get rid of the Y.X naming - which actually provides information to the consumer if you use it correctly - and start getting people used to naming like "Word 2000".
That way it seems more natural when you pay for Word 2003 and then pay again for Word 2004 then next... Cause it better you know... the numbers bigger...
The problem may be that you presuppose that there is blame to be laid. If he disagrees with the assumption implied in your question his answer would not make you happy.
He may not have ducked your question he may have simply disagreed with your premise.
One wonders why he didn't just use some javascript to break out of the frame jail, and then explain that users had been redirected to foo because bar was loading foo's pages?
Or break out and redirect to a goatse-esque page or something similar... Since they're viewing his competitor's site it would appear to be his content right?
The minor version of this DID happen when a school system gave the (vendor lead) school assembly for their great new "evil internet blocking" censorware that they were installing at the school.
The vendor gave and talk and proceeded to type in "www.hotmonkeyloving.com" or some similar site and it - of course - loaded onto the giant screens in the assembly in front of parents and children.
Ahem. It appears no one bothered to install the software on the demo computer... talk about "trecherous computing."
For whatever it's worth someone's reporting that the IBM vectoring is NOT Altivec and isn't Altivec compatible.
I vote for calling it Altivec2 and using this chip whatever it takes... I'd much rather hitch my future to IBMs engineering and manufacturing than Moto's.
As I recall, IBM doesn't have a license to run the AltiVec stuff
Actually, as a AIM partner IBM has full rights and access to the Altivec technology. They just don't seem to want it.
There were rumblings that IBM was 'rolling their own' version of vectoring that would not require special compilation as Altivec does - but that was a while ago and no hard evidence ever emerged. Now IBM is announcing (Oct. 15th) a scaled down Power4 with 160 vectored-operations unit. (Altivec has 162 operations.)
Draw your own conclusions - IBM either scaled the Power4 to PowerPC and added Altivec or their own brand of vectoring that has a very similar number of operations to Altivec.
Actually they were really the one's that broke the story way back on July 2nd. I guess figuring they had nothing to lose...
And also just as clarification they aren't banning people from the event - they're just denying them press passes. But as they mention in the article many press outlets were going to regular badges anyway because employees are being instructed not to talk to people with press credentials.
Actually of the usual rumors sites this one seems pretty reasonable and will probably be proven mostly right... As a rule Think Secret is the best "rumors" site at the moment.
At that point there's only aboput $100 between the flat panel iMac with the SuperDrive and the eMac with the SuperDrive.
Same processor and speed, same HD space etc. The eMac's screen is slightly larger 15" vs. 17" but the LCD has an viewable of 15" so the difference is not that much... The eMac is probably easier to upgrade for the power-user but that's about it....
I personally think I'd go for the iMac with it's fancy stylin' - but more power to 'em for trying this out.
I was surfing this article in OSX IE 5.2 and since I have points I moderating a comment as "funny". When I clicked the "Moderate" button IE blow up on me and want away!
Ack - started returned to the article and it died on me again. Damn... that really sucks. Anyway - third times a charm. Or maybe iCab is the charm...
=tkk
PS All M$ sekurity updates should very clearly read "fixes all KNOWN security issues" - a very important detail.
Slashdot Mirror
Whether the need for near-weekly security updates is a good or bad thing is left up the reader as an exercise.
=tkk
Come on - it was a joke. The real reason is to pad out the distance between dupes and M$ bashing articles.
=tkk
Are these for real?
Yes. Microsoft has acknowledged the authenticity of these documents. Halloween I, II, III and VII are real;
[VII is the one I cited.]
M$ has openly acknowledged that several of them are, in fact, true leaks of M$ memos. I don't have a specific link for that document but someone probably does - ESR says it is and I think it's too boring and buzzowrd compliant to be fake.
But feel free to show us as wrong.
=tkk
What message DID resonate with IT managers? The possibility of being sued for Linux/OSS patent voilations.
"Linux patent violations/risk of being sued" struck a chord with US and Swedish respondents. Seventy-four percent (74%) of Americans and 82% of Swedes stated that the risk of being sued over Linux patent violations made them feel less favorable towards Linux. This was the only message that had a strong impact with any audience.
Hmmm... the only thing that might work is very public lawsuits and threats about patent voilations and what begins to happen?
But M$ would never actually bribe another company to sue (and threaten to sue) the companies that represent the biggest threats to them just as a marketing ploy would they?
This was the only message that had a strong impact with any audience.
Would they?
=tkk
Q:Ever wondered how M$ felt about their "embraced and extended" improved version of Java?
A:In internal documents they refered to it as "polluted Java".
=tkk
Um... 1983? Okay - my assertion might not have been valid 20 years ago. But consoles weren't in competition with computers 20 years ago because personal computers were exotic and rare. (I was playing on an Apple][!)
What I'm saying is the consoles survive by applying specialized hardware towards a certain goal (playing games) and do it at a lower price. Microsoft could not have competed with Sony at the PS2s roll-out because packaging 2 year-old computer hardware into a box and selling it at a loss would NOT have created a box that would have competed in performance with the Playstation. M$ was only able to compete because they entered the market well after the rising tide of general computing power floated general computing power into the range of specialized hardware.
If Sony makes their stated target goal of 1 trillion FPU operations with the PS3 processor it will outstrip ANYTHING that M$ can field for another few years after the PS3 rollout (if they depending on general computing hardware) let alone field at the several hundred dollar price. M$ can continue they schedule of letting general computer power rise to the level of specialized hardware and then repackage it for the masses, but it's not working out very well for them now and it probably won't into the future.
How many XBoxes are they going to sell when the PS3 is about to ship?
=tkk
The problem for M$ is that consoles always outstrip the current offerings by computers - that's how they survive. The newest console offers you things you can't do on your computer yet - and for a couple hundred dollars.
If the PS3 performs anywhere close to the lofty goals they said they were shooting for then M$ has a real problem. The only way to compete with the PS3 (and then Nintendos new box) would be to design their own cutting edge hardware - but the XBox is just a repackaged PC. To repeat their (limited) success they would need to package a dual Opteron system with the newest NVidia system into a box for US$300. The original XBox was only able to compete in hardware because it came out several years after the PS2 shipped - in that gap the PCs had caught up to the consoles - as they always do.
M$ is not a hardware company and they will be hardpressed to EVER ship a box within a couple of years of a console that competes with the newest consoles without becoming a hardware developer.
=tkk
Also-
/. #s less than 100K? Cause we're old.
Q: How is NASA like a walrus?
A: Their both looking for a tight seal.
Q: What did the school teacher leave as a final present for her students?
A: A big blown-up picture of herself.
The school teacher finally got to take her dream vacation - all over Florida.
Damn rec.humor was bad then - people would bust in with the "What does NASA stand for?" joke like it was new for months after that like it was new when they would finally hear it. Damn.
I think rec.humor.funny split off about that time... coincidence?
=tkk
PS Why does everyone whose repeating these jokes have
Actually I think this was also the first real push made by M$ to go to leased software.
Naming your Word Processor or Office Suite after the year makes no sense at all unless you plan to release a new one every year like they do cars. They get rid of the Y.X naming - which actually provides information to the consumer if you use it correctly - and start getting people used to naming like "Word 2000".
That way it seems more natural when you pay for Word 2003 and then pay again for Word 2004 then next...
Cause it better you know... the numbers bigger...
=tkk
Hey! Leave the RIAA out of this! I'm sick of every /. post being about someone's political stance on the RIAA
Shessh! Give it a rest!
=tkk
The problem may be that you presuppose that there is blame to be laid. If he disagrees with the assumption implied in your question his answer would not make you happy.
He may not have ducked your question he may have simply disagreed with your premise.
=tkk
;)
=tkk
PS Where's that guy with the flamebait .sig: "OSX is Unix for people who bathe regularly." when you need him?
While we're wildly off-topic...
"Just once I'd like somebody to call me 'Sir' without adding 'you're making a scene!'".
-Homer Simpson
"In college I was shy. Now they call it stalking - but I was shy..."
-Comic whose name escapes me.
=tkk
Uhhhhhh.... did you say "the TIT industry"?
;)
Huh huh huh... That would be cool...
Yeah, that would rule, eh eh RULE! Yeah rule, yeah..
huh huh huh huh
=TKK
PS Wasn't sure how to take that until I saw your User #.
Rock on brother jonr!
Or break out and redirect to a goatse-esque page or something similar... Since they're viewing his competitor's site it would appear to be his content right?
=tkk
Sorry - was that Tuttle or Buttle? ;)
http://www.ahleman.com/ElectriClerk.html
It's Harry Tuttle approved!
=TKK
The minor version of this DID happen when a school system gave the (vendor lead) school assembly for their great new "evil internet blocking" censorware that they were installing at the school. The vendor gave and talk and proceeded to type in "www.hotmonkeyloving.com" or some similar site and it - of course - loaded onto the giant screens in the assembly in front of parents and children. Ahem. It appears no one bothered to install the software on the demo computer... talk about "trecherous computing."
For whatever it's worth someone's reporting that the IBM vectoring is NOT Altivec and isn't Altivec compatible.
I vote for calling it Altivec2 and using this chip whatever it takes... I'd much rather hitch my future to IBMs engineering and manufacturing than Moto's.
=tkk
Actually, as a AIM partner IBM has full rights and access to the Altivec technology. They just don't seem to want it.
There were rumblings that IBM was 'rolling their own' version of vectoring that would not require special compilation as Altivec does - but that was a while ago and no hard evidence ever emerged. Now IBM is announcing (Oct. 15th) a scaled down Power4 with 160 vectored-operations unit. (Altivec has 162 operations.)
Draw your own conclusions - IBM either scaled the Power4 to PowerPC and added Altivec or their own brand of vectoring that has a very similar number of operations to Altivec.
=tkk
Good summation, about the only thing you left out was the implicit threat to other HP customers.
"Don't think that you're so big we won't drop you like a rock."
Apparently HP thinks this is enough of a problem to react harshly now at the first signs of trouble to possibly head off bigger trouble down the road.
=tkk
Anything M$ v3.x ~= v1.x of anything else.
That seems about right.
=tkk
Actually they were really the one's that broke the story way back on July 2nd. I guess figuring they had nothing to lose...
And also just as clarification they aren't banning people from the event - they're just denying them press passes. But as they mention in the article many press outlets were going to regular badges anyway because employees are being instructed not to talk to people with press credentials.
Actually of the usual rumors sites this one seems pretty reasonable and will probably be proven mostly right... As a rule Think Secret is the best "rumors" site at the moment.
=tkk
At that point there's only aboput $100 between the flat panel iMac with the SuperDrive and the eMac with the SuperDrive.
Same processor and speed, same HD space etc. The eMac's screen is slightly larger 15" vs. 17" but the LCD has an viewable of 15" so the difference is not that much... The eMac is probably easier to upgrade for the power-user but that's about it....
I personally think I'd go for the iMac with it's fancy stylin' - but more power to 'em for trying this out.
=tkk
This was a very plate-of-shrimp moment.
I was surfing this article in OSX IE 5.2 and since I have points I moderating a comment as "funny". When I clicked the "Moderate" button IE blow up on me and want away!
Ack - started returned to the article and it died on me again. Damn... that really sucks. Anyway - third times a charm. Or maybe iCab is the charm...
=tkk
PS All M$ sekurity updates should very clearly read "fixes all KNOWN security issues" - a very important detail.