" Available Soon... PDF Import Extension
The PDF Import Extension allows modifying existing PDF files for which the original source files do not exist anymore. "
Quote from the Arstechnica article: "Microsoft's opportunities] have been systematically squandered through a combination of ineptitude, mismanagement, and slavish adherence to backwards compatibility. The disillusionment I feel is incredible."
Quote from the comment above about possibilities for the future: "That's the theory anyway. Whether MS manage to pull it off is another question."
Why would things be different in the future? Microsoft's record is 22 years of adversarial, below standard, anti-standards behavior. How much money would Microsoft have made if it didn't have ignorant customers and incompatible file formats?
However, I think the major issue is this: The people who design datacenters are some of the smartest people in the world. They've certainly thought about the issues. They know the cost of electricity.
They know that Intel is delivering 45 nanometer CPU designs. They know that Intel is working on 32 nanometer CPUs, and that there will eventually be 22 nanometer processors, for delivery in 8 years. Each new processor architecture uses less power. So, the problem will solve itself, to some degree.
The article in the New York Times is ignorant, meant for ignorant readers who don't know any better. Maybe someone took money; maybe the NYT article is really a public relations stunt, a way for McKinsey & Company to attract as clients managers who have little technical experience.
A lot of people who talk about being "green", are people who are green in the sense of having little experience.
Nvidia is showing signs of being poorly managed. CUDA is a registered trademark of another hi-tech company.
The underlying issue is apparently that Nvidia will lose most of its mid-level business when AMD/ATI and Intel/Larrabee being shipping integrated graphics. Until now, Intel integrated graphics has been so limited as to be useless in many mid-level applications. Nvidia hopes to replace some of that loss with sales to people who want to use their GPUs to do parallel processing.
"Microsoft hasn't been fixing many security issues in Vista because they
think it is very secure."
I think that Microsoft has not been fixing security issues in Vista
because, if they ever deliver a secure operating system, PC customers will
never buy another.
It's not an impossible challenge, making a secure operating system. Other organizations
have done it. If Microsoft hasn't, that is because it doesn't want to.
Microsoft exploits the ignorance of its customers. But now the
customers are beginning to be more technically knowledgeable. Many are, for
example, rejecting Vista. Eventually Microsoft's abusive practices
will have more complete recognition. What will it do then?
Of course, if Microsoft had a good reputation, there is a huge amount
of other software that needs to be wriiten. But that is not an option, because
Microsoft has never been known for creativity.
Maybe Microsoft's slogan should be, "Making money through doing evil."
That's my opinion, but I'm not the only one who thinks that way.
Eventually software's Dr. Death, the Chief of Grief, the Main Chain of Pain, will
become much less influential. Until then, the company is putting the world
through a lot of hassle and extra expense, and wasting the time of some of the
world's most capable people.
From Hacking My PowerShot: "I picked up a [Canon
Powershot] A560 late last year -- it's a wonderfully handy point-and-shoot
camera that even shoots full NTSC video..."
From the link about open source firmware you recommended: Quick answers to 7
key questions about CHDK: "5. What extra capabilities does CHDK
provide? Enhanced ways of recording images... for video images you can have
increased recording time and length (1 hour or 2 GB), and a greatly increased
range of compression options."
The problem will be that there needs to be enough light. There could
be motion detection lights in several places. If a thief is moving around at
night, and suddenly there is a bright light, that changes the psychology of
the situation. Very likely the thief will leave. If he or she doesn't you will
have a video recording.
It seems to me that lights that turn on when motion is detected are
the first best defense. That and signs that say, "Smile, your visit is being
recorded."
Remember that the obvious camera can be a dummy. The real cameras can
be hidden.
But it must be translated from corporate-speak. It doesn't necessarily mean anything, except that he wants to tell you something you want to hear. The translation is: "We want gamers to like us." You already knew that.
I don't intend this to indicate anything about whether I think Intel is serious this time about making competitive GPUs. I'm just commenting on the fact that CEOs often don't believe that what they say must be true. They often just say what they think will make you like them. And it doesn't matter anyway, since they are gods, and make millions even if the company fails.
Quote from the Wikipedia link: "In 2006, he oversaw the largest round of layoffs in Intel history when 10,500 (or 10% of the corporate workforce) employees were laid-off. Job cuts in manufacturing, product design, and other redundancies, were made in an effort to save $3 billion/year in cost by 2008. Of the 10,500 jobs, 1,000 layoffs were at the management level."
"Microsoft has stated XP will be technically supported until 2014."
I've always thought that somewhat misses the point.
The fact is, solely to make more money, Microsoft has claimed that its
earlier product will die. The death is completely independent of customer
demand.
Who would want to partner with such a company? Because that's what you
are doing when you buy an operating system, you are partnering with the OS
supplier. You are betting that the supplier will be a true partner and will
care about your needs, and not choose to be adversarial.
Even though Vista is just Windows XP with new features, Microsoft
expects to be paid as though it is an entirely new product, with no relevance
to the earlier version.
It seems to me that Microsoft is the Chief of Grief, software's Dr.
Death. Other deaths:
Declared dead: FoxPro database programming language
Dead soon: PlaysForSure was corporate-speak for "we will kill it
and destroy access to your music any time we want". Apparently the reason
Microsoft executives wanted to reassure buyers by saying "Plays for Sure" is
that they knew it was not sure.
This is connected with the rise of 3-year-old thinking: "I can do
anything I want. You have no power."
The U.S. government is worse: "We can take your money and give it to
weapons and war suppliers. You have no power. All laws we don't like are
invalid."
Microsoft is the computer industry's Dr. Death. Here are other things from Microsoft that are dead, or declared eventually dead:
Death date set: Windows XP
Declared dead: FoxPro database programming language
Dead soon: PlaysForSure was corporate-speak for "we will kill it and destroy access to your music any time we want". Apparently the reason Microsoft executives wanted to reassure buyers by saying "Plays for Sure" is that they knew it was not sure.
After several nasty vulnerabilities and extremely bad press, they
changed the name. Hey, maybe Jabba the Hutt could change his name and apply
for a job as a supermodel.
The description of Windows Live ID says, "Simplify your sign
in". Yes, simplify, give Microsoft control, and increase the chance of
vulnerabilities. If Microsoft didn't take advantage of the technical ignorance
of its customers, how much profit would it make? In my opinion, far less.
I certainly wouldn't trust data to a company that can't make a web site that renders well in Firefox. They have made an assumption about what minimum font size you will use.
It's abusive. Microsoft has announced its intention to try to force its customers to pay more money, when most are happy with what they have. Whether or not Microsoft is successful is not the point. It's adversarial.
Remember, this is also an attempt to eventually force customers away from Windows XP in the future, only to get more money for Microsoft. It affects people who have thousands of copies and don't want or need new licenses.
I've never heard anything Microsoft did called "very generous" before.
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of people are protesting that Microsoft is
killing the operating system they use, for the sole motive of making more
profit. That's not generous, it's abusive.
The InfoWorld protest is only a tiny percentage of the people
who will be enormously inconvenienced if they are forced eventually to change
to another operating system.
Rather than "very generous", in my opinion the words "viciously
destructive" apply.
Microsoft has scheduled the death of Windows XP at the same time that
it has demonstrated an inability to deliver a new version. Even Steve Ballmer
admits that Microsoft has been unable to deliver a finished operating system.
He calls it "a work in
progress".
Apparently good programmers don't want to work for Microsoft. If they
are very skilled and creative, they want to work for Google.
Bill Gates leaves Microsoft soon. Steve Ballmer is trying to buy
Yahoo, a company with 16,000 employees, many of whom don't want to work for
him. Yahoo doesn't have skilled programmers, or they wouldn't be having
financial problems during a time when Google is doing very well. Now does not
seem a good time to consider buying anything new from Microsoft.
Windows XP won't sold after June 31, 2008, 68 days from now (2008-04-22).
This is how it works in practice: Once Microsoft has started a product on its death march, it is difficult for a corporation to continue to be involved with it.
What happens if your laptop is encrypted? Can they tell you how it is supposed to work if the boot code is temporarily disabled? Can they expect you to supply a password? What happens if you carry the laptop hard drive in your pocket?
The free, open source TrueCrypt works with Windows and Linux and now encrypts the boot partition, on the fly, while the the computer is being used.
Don't get too excited. Remember the Microsoft motto: "Our customers are our
beta testers." Remember that Microsoft is the Chief of Grief -- Let
someone else have the pain. Wait until the bugs are found; SP3 version 3 may
be the one you want.
Windows XP was first released in 2001. Windows XP created severe
problems for us until SP2 was released in 2004.
So, Windows XP gave us 3 years of misery and 3 years of relative
usefulness, but with extreme vulnerability to malware. And now Microsoft has
declared the death of Windows XP in June 2008.
Is it any wonder why people don't want Windows Vista?
An indication of the hassle people had with
downloading 3 years of updates is this quote from Paul Thurrott, who is
over-the-top pro-Microsoft, and who often apologizes for Microsoft's
abusiveness in a way that tries to make abusive behavior sound less
destructive:... the 100+ updates that Microsoft has shipped since SP2 can
be a nightmare to deploy.
My opinion is that Microsoft is very badly managed. Windows XP gave us
50% big hassles and 50% mild hassles. Do you want to partner with a company
that has so frequently abused you in the past?
"... there is no single "silver bullet" solution..."
There is a fundamental improvement that could be made, however. The
U.S. government is as corrupt as 8 years of selling favors to private
interests can make it. We could stop the corruption.
Corrupt big companies with little creative ability want to make the
patent system as complicated as possible for smaller companies. That's why not
enough money is available for the patent office to do its job correctly; the
corrupters have been deliberately starving government agencies that prevent
corruption. They've been starving the SEC, too.
More evidence of widespread corruption: It costs more than $1,000,000
of U.S. taxpayer's money to kill each Iraqi, most of whom are very poor. That
shows the real purpose of the war is embezzling money from the taxpayer to
give it to weapons and war investors.
Notes about the U.S. government-Iraq war: 1) I've liked every Iraqi
I've met in the United States. I don't want them killed. (I've never been to
Iraq.)
2) There was always violence in Iraq. Supposedly one "justification"
for the war was stopping Saddam's violence. Now, however, U.S. taxpayers have
caused more violence in a few years than all the violence caused by Saddam
Hussein.
3) Notice that prices in the U.S. are rising rapidly. That's because
the U.S. government has been printing more money to pay for the theft of
taxpayer money that war makes possible.
4) The way to not have enemies is to make relationships. The U.S.
government has been doing the opposite of that.
Since before 1953, when the U.S. government overthrew a democratically
elected president of Iran, The U.S. government has been killing Muslims and
Arabs and destroying their property. For example, the U.S. government has been
donating $5 billion each year of taxpayer money to Israelis to be used to buy
weapons from U.S. weapons manufacturers. The manufacturers get high profits
because Israelis are willing to pay high prices when the money is not theirs.
I've often had the perception that.NET and C Sharp and Java are programming
resources for others to use. They are easily decompiled, so that big
companies like Microsoft and Sun can examine how the software of competitors
is written. They have limited support, so that writing a competing application
in C++ is likely to be faster and better.
(Microsoft executives lack communication skills. The name
".NET" and naming things using X, such as XBox and ActiveX, are
examples.)
Quote from the parent comment: "I think it was Jim Allchin"
Is it true that there never was anyone named Jim Allchin? Isn't "All
chin" just a name for the real Microsoft executive, Jabba the Hutt?
Okay, maybe not.
(Hutt biting the heads off of cute sqeaky animals makes Steve
Ballmer's chair-throwing look comparatively healthy.)
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, is says:
" Available Soon... PDF Import Extension
The PDF Import Extension allows modifying existing PDF files for which the original source files do not exist anymore. "
However, that was August 2007.
Quote from the Arstechnica article: "Microsoft's opportunities] have been systematically squandered through a combination of ineptitude, mismanagement, and slavish adherence to backwards compatibility. The disillusionment I feel is incredible."
Quote from the comment above about possibilities for the future: "That's the theory anyway. Whether MS manage to pull it off is another question."
Why would things be different in the future? Microsoft's record is 22 years of adversarial, below standard, anti-standards behavior. How much money would Microsoft have made if it didn't have ignorant customers and incompatible file formats?
I think you have made some interesting points.
However, I think the major issue is this: The people who design datacenters are some of the smartest people in the world. They've certainly thought about the issues. They know the cost of electricity.
They know that Intel is delivering 45 nanometer CPU designs. They know that Intel is working on 32 nanometer CPUs, and that there will eventually be 22 nanometer processors, for delivery in 8 years. Each new processor architecture uses less power. So, the problem will solve itself, to some degree.
The article in the New York Times is ignorant, meant for ignorant readers who don't know any better. Maybe someone took money; maybe the NYT article is really a public relations stunt, a way for McKinsey & Company to attract as clients managers who have little technical experience.
A lot of people who talk about being "green", are people who are green in the sense of having little experience.
Avoid the blog spam. This is the actual article in EE times: Nvidia unleashes Cuda attack on parallel-compute challenge.
Nvidia is showing signs of being poorly managed. CUDA is a registered trademark of another hi-tech company.
The underlying issue is apparently that Nvidia will lose most of its mid-level business when AMD/ATI and Intel/Larrabee being shipping integrated graphics. Until now, Intel integrated graphics has been so limited as to be useless in many mid-level applications. Nvidia hopes to replace some of that loss with sales to people who want to use their GPUs to do parallel processing.
In my opinion, partnering with Microsoft has been ugly. For example, Microsoft knew that Vista had problems before it was released: Suit says Microsoft knew it misled -- E-mails raised Vista doubts.
Windows Vista users suffer a ghastly performance loss (roughly two times, hardware for hardware).
"Microsoft hasn't been fixing many security issues in Vista because they think it is very secure."
I think that Microsoft has not been fixing security issues in Vista because, if they ever deliver a secure operating system, PC customers will never buy another.
It's not an impossible challenge, making a secure operating system. Other organizations have done it. If Microsoft hasn't, that is because it doesn't want to.
Microsoft exploits the ignorance of its customers. But now the customers are beginning to be more technically knowledgeable. Many are, for example, rejecting Vista. Eventually Microsoft's abusive practices will have more complete recognition. What will it do then?
Of course, if Microsoft had a good reputation, there is a huge amount of other software that needs to be wriiten. But that is not an option, because Microsoft has never been known for creativity.
Maybe Microsoft's slogan should be, "Making money through doing evil." That's my opinion, but I'm not the only one who thinks that way.
Eventually software's Dr. Death, the Chief of Grief, the Main Chain of Pain, will become much less influential. Until then, the company is putting the world through a lot of hassle and extra expense, and wasting the time of some of the world's most capable people.
Excellent comment!
... for video images you can have
increased recording time and length (1 hour or 2 GB), and a greatly increased
range of compression options."
From Hacking My PowerShot: "I picked up a [Canon Powershot] A560 late last year -- it's a wonderfully handy point-and-shoot camera that even shoots full NTSC video..."
From the link about open source firmware you recommended: Quick answers to 7 key questions about CHDK: "5. What extra capabilities does CHDK provide? Enhanced ways of recording images
The problem will be that there needs to be enough light. There could be motion detection lights in several places. If a thief is moving around at night, and suddenly there is a bright light, that changes the psychology of the situation. Very likely the thief will leave. If he or she doesn't you will have a video recording.
It seems to me that lights that turn on when motion is detected are the first best defense. That and signs that say, "Smile, your visit is being recorded."
Remember that the obvious camera can be a dummy. The real cameras can be hidden.
A sign saying, "Smile, you are being videotaped" would do nicely.
Be sure to have an obvious camera, one of those $7 camera dummies. Then do the real recording from two other hidden cameras.
"On the black market these days, a full identity (name, SSN, address, bank information, etc) can go for $14 each."
Good answer. Next question: Doesn't all modern tape backup software encrypt all data?
Even my personal DVD backups are encrypted automatically.
PFY = Pimply Faced Youth
This sounds real to me. Intel CEO Paul Otellini could have said that.
But it must be translated from corporate-speak. It doesn't necessarily mean anything, except that he wants to tell you something you want to hear. The translation is: "We want gamers to like us." You already knew that.
I don't intend this to indicate anything about whether I think Intel is serious this time about making competitive GPUs. I'm just commenting on the fact that CEOs often don't believe that what they say must be true. They often just say what they think will make you like them. And it doesn't matter anyway, since they are gods, and make millions even if the company fails.
Quote from the Wikipedia link: "In 2006, he oversaw the largest round of layoffs in Intel history when 10,500 (or 10% of the corporate workforce) employees were laid-off. Job cuts in manufacturing, product design, and other redundancies, were made in an effort to save $3 billion/year in cost by 2008. Of the 10,500 jobs, 1,000 layoffs were at the management level."
"Microsoft has stated XP will be technically supported until 2014."
I've always thought that somewhat misses the point.
The fact is, solely to make more money, Microsoft has claimed that its earlier product will die. The death is completely independent of customer demand.
Who would want to partner with such a company? Because that's what you are doing when you buy an operating system, you are partnering with the OS supplier. You are betting that the supplier will be a true partner and will care about your needs, and not choose to be adversarial.
Even though Vista is just Windows XP with new features, Microsoft expects to be paid as though it is an entirely new product, with no relevance to the earlier version.
It seems to me that Microsoft is the Chief of Grief, software's Dr. Death. Other deaths:
Declared dead: FoxPro database programming language
Dead soon: PlaysForSure was corporate-speak for "we will kill it and destroy access to your music any time we want". Apparently the reason Microsoft executives wanted to reassure buyers by saying "Plays for Sure" is that they knew it was not sure.
This is connected with the rise of 3-year-old thinking: "I can do anything I want. You have no power."
The U.S. government is worse: "We can take your money and give it to weapons and war suppliers. You have no power. All laws we don't like are invalid."
Microsoft is the computer industry's Dr. Death. Here are other things from Microsoft that are dead, or declared eventually dead:
Death date set: Windows XP
Declared dead: FoxPro database programming language
Dead soon: PlaysForSure was corporate-speak for "we will kill it and destroy access to your music any time we want". Apparently the reason Microsoft executives wanted to reassure buyers by saying "Plays for Sure" is that they knew it was not sure.
Good point.
"Microsoft still uses Passport for its own stuff."
Yes, but now they call it Windows Live ID.
After several nasty vulnerabilities and extremely bad press, they changed the name. Hey, maybe Jabba the Hutt could change his name and apply for a job as a supermodel.
The description of Windows Live ID says, "Simplify your sign in". Yes, simplify, give Microsoft control, and increase the chance of vulnerabilities. If Microsoft didn't take advantage of the technical ignorance of its customers, how much profit would it make? In my opinion, far less.
I certainly wouldn't trust data to a company that can't make a web site that renders well in Firefox. They have made an assumption about what minimum font size you will use.
Remember Microsoft Passport? That was another attempt to dominate users.
Google: "Do no evil."
Microsoft: "The only way we know how to make money is by doing evil."
My opinion, but I'm not the only one who thinks that way.
"A lot of people are exaggerating the situation."
..."
"... while at the same time screwing those
It's abusive. Microsoft has announced its intention to try to force its customers to pay more money, when most are happy with what they have. Whether or not Microsoft is successful is not the point. It's adversarial.
Remember, this is also an attempt to eventually force customers away from Windows XP in the future, only to get more money for Microsoft. It affects people who have thousands of copies and don't want or need new licenses.
EXTREMELY abusive.
"... very generous ..."
I've never heard anything Microsoft did called "very generous" before.
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of people are protesting that Microsoft is killing the operating system they use, for the sole motive of making more profit. That's not generous, it's abusive.
The InfoWorld protest is only a tiny percentage of the people who will be enormously inconvenienced if they are forced eventually to change to another operating system.
Rather than "very generous", in my opinion the words "viciously destructive" apply.
Microsoft has scheduled the death of Windows XP at the same time that it has demonstrated an inability to deliver a new version. Even Steve Ballmer admits that Microsoft has been unable to deliver a finished operating system. He calls it "a work in progress".
Apparently good programmers don't want to work for Microsoft. If they are very skilled and creative, they want to work for Google.
Bill Gates leaves Microsoft soon. Steve Ballmer is trying to buy Yahoo, a company with 16,000 employees, many of whom don't want to work for him. Yahoo doesn't have skilled programmers, or they wouldn't be having financial problems during a time when Google is doing very well. Now does not seem a good time to consider buying anything new from Microsoft.
The U.S. is becoming a police state, apparently.
Stealing the laptop won't help if they don't have the password.
Truecrypt has the ability to make hidden encrypted partitions.
Windows XP won't sold after June 31, 2008, 68 days from now (2008-04-22).
This is how it works in practice: Once Microsoft has started a product on its death march, it is difficult for a corporation to continue to be involved with it.
"... government gets to meet its agenda."
What happens if your laptop is encrypted? Can they tell you how it is supposed to work if the boot code is temporarily disabled? Can they expect you to supply a password? What happens if you carry the laptop hard drive in your pocket?
The free, open source TrueCrypt works with Windows and Linux and now encrypts the boot partition, on the fly, while the the computer is being used.
Don't get too excited. Remember the Microsoft motto: "Our customers are our beta testers." Remember that Microsoft is the Chief of Grief -- Let someone else have the pain. Wait until the bugs are found; SP3 version 3 may be the one you want.
... the 100+ updates that Microsoft has shipped since SP2 can
be a nightmare to deploy.
Windows XP was first released in 2001. Windows XP created severe problems for us until SP2 was released in 2004.
So, Windows XP gave us 3 years of misery and 3 years of relative usefulness, but with extreme vulnerability to malware. And now Microsoft has declared the death of Windows XP in June 2008.
Is it any wonder why people don't want Windows Vista?
An indication of the hassle people had with downloading 3 years of updates is this quote from Paul Thurrott, who is over-the-top pro-Microsoft, and who often apologizes for Microsoft's abusiveness in a way that tries to make abusive behavior sound less destructive:
My opinion is that Microsoft is very badly managed. Windows XP gave us 50% big hassles and 50% mild hassles. Do you want to partner with a company that has so frequently abused you in the past?
"... Microsoft has likely spent more on security than China has spent on democracy"
Very creative. I can do that, too! My example: Women spend more money on makeup than children spend on trapping hedgehogs.
Microsoft makes more money when computers are less secure, because many people who have malware buy new computers: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster.
"... there is no single "silver bullet" solution..."
There is a fundamental improvement that could be made, however. The U.S. government is as corrupt as 8 years of selling favors to private interests can make it. We could stop the corruption.
Corrupt big companies with little creative ability want to make the patent system as complicated as possible for smaller companies. That's why not enough money is available for the patent office to do its job correctly; the corrupters have been deliberately starving government agencies that prevent corruption. They've been starving the SEC, too.
See Principles for thinking about U.S. government corruption.
More evidence of widespread corruption: It costs more than $1,000,000 of U.S. taxpayer's money to kill each Iraqi, most of whom are very poor. That shows the real purpose of the war is embezzling money from the taxpayer to give it to weapons and war investors.
Notes about the U.S. government-Iraq war: 1) I've liked every Iraqi I've met in the United States. I don't want them killed. (I've never been to Iraq.)
2) There was always violence in Iraq. Supposedly one "justification" for the war was stopping Saddam's violence. Now, however, U.S. taxpayers have caused more violence in a few years than all the violence caused by Saddam Hussein.
3) Notice that prices in the U.S. are rising rapidly. That's because the U.S. government has been printing more money to pay for the theft of taxpayer money that war makes possible.
4) The way to not have enemies is to make relationships. The U.S. government has been doing the opposite of that.
Since before 1953, when the U.S. government overthrew a democratically elected president of Iran, The U.S. government has been killing Muslims and Arabs and destroying their property. For example, the U.S. government has been donating $5 billion each year of taxpayer money to Israelis to be used to buy weapons from U.S. weapons manufacturers. The manufacturers get high profits because Israelis are willing to pay high prices when the money is not theirs.
I've often had the perception that .NET and C Sharp and Java are programming
resources for others to use. They are easily decompiled, so that big
companies like Microsoft and Sun can examine how the software of competitors
is written. They have limited support, so that writing a competing application
in C++ is likely to be faster and better.
(Microsoft executives lack communication skills. The name ".NET" and naming things using X, such as XBox and ActiveX, are examples.)
Quote from the parent comment: "I think it was Jim Allchin"
Is it true that there never was anyone named Jim Allchin? Isn't "All chin" just a name for the real Microsoft executive, Jabba the Hutt?
Okay, maybe not.
(Hutt biting the heads off of cute sqeaky animals makes Steve Ballmer's chair-throwing look comparatively healthy.)