1) It means they sell PS3's to people not interested in playing games, causing Sony to loose money 2) It means that the blu-ray format won't be as established, meaning that gamers won't see the blu-ray format as something in the "pro" column when the console first ships
Use your common sense, it isn't complicated at all. Imagine how much time IE would spend on boot building an index if it had to scan the 20,000+ files in the cache folder plus god knows what else). In fact, I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that it's a memory mapped file representing some internal IE data structure.
Saying that they can't be touched under normal circumstances is a misnomer -- they can't be "touched" while they're in use (ie: when a specific user is logged in).
They're not deleted when you clear the cache because they're an index, not the cache (and the braindead moron who implemented the clear cache functionality didn't think of ZEROING the contents of the index). You can't touch them while the user is logged in because they're in use. They reappear on next boot because, guess what, IE loads on boot with explorer.
These files are in your user profile directory. If you're that concerned about it, choose a sane password so the other users on your computer won't know how much pr0n you look at.
I swear the people posting this crap must be mentally retarded. Wow, the webbrowser keeps an index of contents in it's cache and history archive... Imagine that. They should be ashamed of doing such a thing.
How do you figure that? Seems to me like someone high up (and recall that Billg himself has been touting this game and its Vista/360 LiveAnywhere capabilities) didn't like his comments, and he was told that he should "take a closer look", and then take another shot at making public comments. So he toned down his comments to a much less critical, yet still somewhat credible level.
Riiight. You just flipped the "paranoid tinfoil hat man" bit.
Nobody has been disputing that.
Yes they have. The whole "the guy works for Microsoft he has to be lying" crap directly conflicts with your assertion.
But that doesn't make it a Shadowrun game.
You mean Shadowrun RPG. There are more game genre's than RPGs. If this isn't what a Shadowrun squad based shooter would look, what WOULD it look like?
or at least do a major rework of the backstory so that it doesn't mangle SR quite so badly (which, given the type of game and the fact that there is not much backstory to begin with, should take a few hours, a bit more if they actually decide to do a little research this time).
Gee, that feedback sounds very familiar...
Re:probably on Microsoft's list of next important
on
Apache down, IIS up
·
· Score: 1
It is absolutely uniquivically NOT a violation of anti-trust law for Microsoft to spend money earned from XP to develop/imporve their server OS. Spending money on some things can be an anti-trust violation, but it has no bearing on the SOURCE of that money.
"I'm usually not one to openly criticise my employer (Microsoft) on my blog. However the travesty which has befallen Shadowrun demands that I speak out. After FASA imploded many years ago Microsoft ended up with all the computer game rights to the FASA properties (Battletech, Shadowrun and even freaking Earthdawn). Now I understand that we must make some comprimise in the nature of a game when we transfer it from pen & paper to a computer. I'm a PM: I understand the business of tough comprimises. What happened here was not a comprimise: it was total freaking re-invention. I'm not talking the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica with human looking cylons: I'm talking about re-making Lord of the Rings in which Frodo drives to Morder in a Lamborghini Murciélago. If you work for FASA and you are reading this then I welcome you to take the shuttle over to my office and punch me the face. Seriously: I won't be offended since your damn game just kicked me the metaphoric balls."
Read the guy's original critique after the announcement was made. If that doesn't convince you the guy played the game and honestly thought it was decent, then nothing will.
Re: backstory... the game is a squad shooter set in the shadowrun universe, not a shadowrun rpg. What is the purpose of backstory? Nothing short of a novel will do the "universe" any good.
Re:Proof we are not a democracy
on
Death By DMCA
·
· Score: 1
In a democracy, the government decides everything. The people only have the power to change the government, but they cannot tell them what to do or what not to do.
You need to retake a high school civics class. In a democracy, the people vote on everything. The US government isn't a democracy, it's a democratic republic. It means the people elects representatives, and those representatives decide everything.
A democratic republic is supposed to help avoid the tryanny of the majority -- a situation where the majority of the people act in their best intrest to the detriment of the minority.
Re:Proof we are not a democracy
on
Death By DMCA
·
· Score: 1
Of course we're not a democracy. We're a democratic republic.
Which problem? There were like 5 discussed in the previous message. Not that I necessarily have a solution, though I generally feel doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing...
The idea isn't to provide MORE information to the user, the idea is to provide ENOUGH of the RIGHT information to the user so that they can make a good decision.
But I can't shake the feeling that their idea of increased security is, "WE decide, case by case, what operations are safe for you to do on your computer."
Isn't that exactly what they're SUPPOSED to be doing? I mean, do you really think that no differenation should be made between modifying kernel32.dll and modifing a document?
If an operation can be performed that won't grant some miscreant additional privleges or perform some malicious task, why shouldn't you be able to do it as a non-admin? If it would grant some miscreant additional priveleges or a perform malicious task, why shouldn't you be required to do it as admin?
"The hope here is that the user won't need to launch many administrative applications."
Why is that bad? Do you like having lots of software running as root? Is that a good thing? Of course not!
Why can't my child run the anti-virus checker?" "They're not supposed to."
Your child can run the AV checker just fine. They just can't mess with the anti-virus services, drivers, or configuration. As it should be.
Sounds to me like by the time Vista goes gold, Microsoft will have successfully determined what set of operations we should be allowed to do with our computers to make the system somewhat usable by MOST users, MOST of the time....unless you escallate privs.
They do, if the application is signed and the signature is verified. Unsigned applications show a different prompt (colors and text are different, etc). Why? You can't trust that the unsigned app you're running isn't a cleverly disguised piece of malware, so you have to treat it differently.
They need to restrict new applications by default, but maybe offer templates to ease the security.
Congratulations, you just opened a security hole. All malware has to do is find an application with "eased" security and use it to escallate its own privleges.
The installer should be a standard OS feature and should ask what type of applications something is: internet application, game, online game, office app, system utility, or miscellaneous.
How is the installer going to know what type of application it is running? Why, the only method possible -- data in the MSI. Congratulations, you just opened another security hole. Malware will just lie and use whichever "feature" grants the broadest set of access.
It should provide security boxes with real English and buttons that are actions not "Continue/Cancel." Having them all the same will train people to always click the same option, just as it did with "OK/Cancel."
Look at a LUA prompt sometime. It already does this.
Malware still has access to that information without an index. The lack of an index doesn't make your system any more secure, it just means that the malware author has to spend 15 more minutes writing a routine to search files.
Expected != want. Perhaps your memory isn't very good, but after they made the annoucement everyone was calling bullshit, claiming it wasn't possible, and even if it were possible it wouldn't be very many games, etc.
Word guesses that since you had a bullet on the previous line that you want bullets on the rest of the document. I can tell you right now that 99% of the time that assumption is false.
No, it guesses that a bulleted list consists of more than one line, and that it is faster to hit enter twice to end the list than it is to explicitely create a bullet for each line.
Everyone expected Microsoft to announce that Halo, Halo2, and maybe half a dozen other games would be back-compat at launch. They delivered over 200. To me, that qualifies as exceeding expectations...
See, here is the real way that OSS will be killed: 1. Gates will say that OSS supports terrorists 2. Bush will have a law passed through congress making supporting of possessing OSS illegal 3. Law enforcement will raid your house and ship you to guantanamo for downloading Linux
See, no DRM required. Yes, I too can put on the tinfoil hat and lay out a paranoid fantasy/conspiracy that will never happen.
They either continue to produce content in traditional forms (ex: cd) or go to the first company to provide DRM (see iTunes).
Gates. If MS didn't support DRM, there'd still be plenty of content
That's why media companies were making their content available for years on PCs... wait, they only started that after some form of copy protection existed. Care to list some examples of that "plentiful" content?
Slashdot Mirror
It's bad for Sony for 2 reasons:
1) It means they sell PS3's to people not interested in playing games, causing Sony to loose money
2) It means that the blu-ray format won't be as established, meaning that gamers won't see the blu-ray format as something in the "pro" column when the console first ships
Use your common sense, it isn't complicated at all. Imagine how much time IE would spend on boot building an index if it had to scan the 20,000+ files in the cache folder plus god knows what else). In fact, I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that it's a memory mapped file representing some internal IE data structure.
Saying that they can't be touched under normal circumstances is a misnomer -- they can't be "touched" while they're in use (ie: when a specific user is logged in).
They're not deleted when you clear the cache because they're an index, not the cache (and the braindead moron who implemented the clear cache functionality didn't think of ZEROING the contents of the index). You can't touch them while the user is logged in because they're in use. They reappear on next boot because, guess what, IE loads on boot with explorer.
These files are in your user profile directory. If you're that concerned about it, choose a sane password so the other users on your computer won't know how much pr0n you look at.
I swear the people posting this crap must be mentally retarded. Wow, the webbrowser keeps an index of contents in it's cache and history archive... Imagine that. They should be ashamed of doing such a thing.
How do you figure that? Seems to me like someone high up (and recall that Billg himself has been touting this game and its Vista/360 LiveAnywhere capabilities) didn't like his comments, and he was told that he should "take a closer look", and then take another shot at making public comments. So he toned down his comments to a much less critical, yet still somewhat credible level.
...
Riiight. You just flipped the "paranoid tinfoil hat man" bit.
Nobody has been disputing that.
Yes they have. The whole "the guy works for Microsoft he has to be lying" crap directly conflicts with your assertion.
But that doesn't make it a Shadowrun game.
You mean Shadowrun RPG. There are more game genre's than RPGs. If this isn't what a Shadowrun squad based shooter would look, what WOULD it look like?
or at least do a major rework of the backstory so that it doesn't mangle SR quite so badly (which, given the type of game and the fact that there is not much backstory to begin with, should take a few hours, a bit more if they actually decide to do a little research this time).
Gee, that feedback sounds very familiar
It is absolutely uniquivically NOT a violation of anti-trust law for Microsoft to spend money earned from XP to develop/imporve their server OS. Spending money on some things can be an anti-trust violation, but it has no bearing on the SOURCE of that money.
Apple?
"I'm usually not one to openly criticise my employer (Microsoft) on my blog. However the travesty which has befallen Shadowrun demands that I speak out. After FASA imploded many years ago Microsoft ended up with all the computer game rights to the FASA properties (Battletech, Shadowrun and even freaking Earthdawn). Now I understand that we must make some comprimise in the nature of a game when we transfer it from pen & paper to a computer. I'm a PM: I understand the business of tough comprimises. What happened here was not a comprimise: it was total freaking re-invention. I'm not talking the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica with human looking cylons: I'm talking about re-making Lord of the Rings in which Frodo drives to Morder in a Lamborghini Murciélago. If you work for FASA and you are reading this then I welcome you to take the shuttle over to my office and punch me the face. Seriously: I won't be offended since your damn game just kicked me the metaphoric balls."
= 20
http://www.philiprichardson.org/blog/post.aspx?id
Read the guy's original critique after the announcement was made. If that doesn't convince you the guy played the game and honestly thought it was decent, then nothing will.
... the game is a squad shooter set in the shadowrun universe, not a shadowrun rpg. What is the purpose of backstory? Nothing short of a novel will do the "universe" any good.
Re: backstory
Who the heck said anything about default user? The original complaint was the the *first* user created on the box is always an Admin.
The original Pentium floating point bug?
In a democracy, the government decides everything. The people only have the power to change the government, but they cannot tell them what to do or what not to do.
You need to retake a high school civics class. In a democracy, the people vote on everything. The US government isn't a democracy, it's a democratic republic. It means the people elects representatives, and those representatives decide everything.
A democratic republic is supposed to help avoid the tryanny of the majority -- a situation where the majority of the people act in their best intrest to the detriment of the minority.
Of course we're not a democracy. We're a democratic republic.
Which problem? There were like 5 discussed in the previous message. Not that I necessarily have a solution, though I generally feel doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing...
The idea isn't to provide MORE information to the user, the idea is to provide ENOUGH of the RIGHT information to the user so that they can make a good decision.
But I can't shake the feeling that their idea of increased security is, "WE decide, case by case, what operations are safe for you to do on your computer."
...unless you escallate privs.
Isn't that exactly what they're SUPPOSED to be doing? I mean, do you really think that no differenation should be made between modifying kernel32.dll and modifing a document?
If an operation can be performed that won't grant some miscreant additional privleges or perform some malicious task, why shouldn't you be able to do it as a non-admin? If it would grant some miscreant additional priveleges or a perform malicious task, why shouldn't you be required to do it as admin?
"The hope here is that the user won't need to launch many administrative applications."
Why is that bad? Do you like having lots of software running as root? Is that a good thing? Of course not!
Why can't my child run the anti-virus checker?" "They're not supposed to."
Your child can run the AV checker just fine. They just can't mess with the anti-virus services, drivers, or configuration. As it should be.
Sounds to me like by the time Vista goes gold, Microsoft will have successfully determined what set of operations we should be allowed to do with our computers to make the system somewhat usable by MOST users, MOST of the time.
They need readable program names.
They do, if the application is signed and the signature is verified. Unsigned applications show a different prompt (colors and text are different, etc). Why? You can't trust that the unsigned app you're running isn't a cleverly disguised piece of malware, so you have to treat it differently.
They need to restrict new applications by default, but maybe offer templates to ease the security.
Congratulations, you just opened a security hole. All malware has to do is find an application with "eased" security and use it to escallate its own privleges.
The installer should be a standard OS feature and should ask what type of applications something is: internet application, game, online game, office app, system utility, or miscellaneous.
How is the installer going to know what type of application it is running? Why, the only method possible -- data in the MSI. Congratulations, you just opened another security hole. Malware will just lie and use whichever "feature" grants the broadest set of access.
It should provide security boxes with real English and buttons that are actions not "Continue/Cancel." Having them all the same will train people to always click the same option, just as it did with "OK/Cancel."
Look at a LUA prompt sometime. It already does this.
winsta0 is the interactive user's desktop session, not the secure desktop.
Malware still has access to that information without an index. The lack of an index doesn't make your system any more secure, it just means that the malware author has to spend 15 more minutes writing a routine to search files.
I'm happy for you. The first user created on both systems is still an Admin ...
Expected != want. Perhaps your memory isn't very good, but after they made the annoucement everyone was calling bullshit, claiming it wasn't possible, and even if it were possible it wouldn't be very many games, etc.
Word guesses that since you had a bullet on the previous line that you want bullets on the rest of the document. I can tell you right now that 99% of the time that assumption is false.
No, it guesses that a bulleted list consists of more than one line, and that it is faster to hit enter twice to end the list than it is to explicitely create a bullet for each line.
In either of those two sequences, the first user created is an Administrator. You just don't get to choose the name you give to the user...
The first user defined during installation is automatically granted administrative privileges
...
I love this complaint. As if it were possible to create an administrator account from a non-admin account
Everyone expected Microsoft to announce that Halo, Halo2, and maybe half a dozen other games would be back-compat at launch. They delivered over 200. To me, that qualifies as exceeding expectations...
That wasn't specific, it was delusional.
See, here is the real way that OSS will be killed:
1. Gates will say that OSS supports terrorists
2. Bush will have a law passed through congress making supporting of possessing OSS illegal
3. Law enforcement will raid your house and ship you to guantanamo for downloading Linux
See, no DRM required. Yes, I too can put on the tinfoil hat and lay out a paranoid fantasy/conspiracy that will never happen.
If they don't produce the content, they go where?
... wait, they only started that after some form of copy protection existed. Care to list some examples of that "plentiful" content?
They either continue to produce content in traditional forms (ex: cd) or go to the first company to provide DRM (see iTunes).
Gates. If MS didn't support DRM, there'd still be plenty of content
That's why media companies were making their content available for years on PCs