With that good point Why would Microsoft write a whole new browser, that they will not sell and make no direct profit off of, when they could re-tool a uniamiously decided better browesr into their own, for less work, and thusly less money?
Or at the very least use Gecko as their basic web rendering engine and add all thir stuff on top. So they realy can claim full compatibality with other browsers and standards, as well as keep all their functionality.
In truth we have heard very little about what MS intends to do with Longhorn IE. it would not suprise me at all if they did this and clamed they they are friendly to all open source software, and at the same time CR the shit out of everything they added preventing others from doing the same.
I beleve what he ment was that EXT3 (and none others I can think of atm but i'm sure there are some) don't need to be manualy defragmented at all. The FS handles fragmentation dynamicaly as files are created and deleted.
Any FS can be defragmented by moving files around on the disk. But the file system dosen't actualy do it, a seprate program does.
Not completly true. The origonal intent was to have WinFS work over netowrked machines so you could use detabase searches to find info acros your entire network. MS realised that would more complicated then their time table allowed (flexable as we all know it is anyway). Their solution was to leave that part out. WinFS will only work on the local machine. This means buisnesses cant use it. but it is still fully functional for individual home users.
This is simply the begining.
When Television was introduced. Radio was the "Entertainment Meidum King". At the time you gad Great Radio!. Real shows with people voice acting, and using all maner of thing to emulate sounds. Basicaly TV withought the picture. As more and more people bought Televisions fewer people listened to Radio. Radios eventualy got used to making less money and offering diffrent programing, A.K.A. Pop Music.
Just now Broadband Inter it reaching that critical mass where it is offering people a better alternative to things a diffrent entertainment meidum does(tv). I'm not saying that a 12% in young male viewers is becouse of the net. I think there are other causes, like women centric programing becoming dominate, do to advirtiser pressure.
A far as News and information is consirned The internet is far better a distrobution network than anyother alternatives. But the people who are realyinterested in the "News" information are also generaly the most consertive consumers and are slower to migrate to a new medium. (maby)
As was mentioned Spike TV shows many lout flashy comirtals that use techniques you would to the the atension of a child, becouse like it or not young men are more like children than any demographic other than thildren. Anybody who dosent beleve it has never atended a super bowl party and therefor has an un-informed opinon.
This transition is not yet realy eveidant however it has none the less begun. It will probiblytake close to annother 5 years before anybody important realises this and tries to do somthing about it. It will be at least another decade before the transition is over. but in 20 years TV will be like radio today, And entertainment will on demand based via the interet. whare you have a Distrobution company that runs the servers and hosts various shows.
The Distrobuter will charge viewersd and advertisers, and pay content makers like TV today. The content makers might live with that (like most) or they can also gain other income through product placement (like a few). Then the "Viewers" will pay the distroubters for streaming the shows, individualy or as a "season pass" or even a full pass that lets you watch anything you want whenever you want.
--
Yes this is somthing Microsoft should have done but didn't.
Some industrius emploies started the windows power tools in their spare time. Then Microsoft took the idea and ran with it. Making them an offical unsupported product.
I think it's strange no IE staff thought it would be a good idea to try the same with the IE's standards issues. Were they stopped by microsoft? Or am I just a conspiracy theorist.
My question would be what version of windows are they using? Granted I was raised on computers, but my Windows XP machine has had uptimes in excess of 2 months.(only truned off by choice)
I use it for everything from video and graphic editing, to eMail and word processing, Web design and Winamp all simultainsouly. SETI@home using any extra cycles the processor might have left. Defrags and automated backups to a windows 2000 box (when a movie isn't compiling) happen every week.
I agree holeheartedly that all previous versions had to be rebooted daily even if only as a preventive measure to keep them from crashing.
I am in no way loyal to Microshit. I never use Media player or IE they both are reletive shite compaired to other *Free* options. I have tried Linux 3 times over the past few years, I probibly will again with Mandrake 10. It keeps getting better every time I try, I hope (but doubt) this time it will be good enough to perminatly switch.
Slashdot Mirror
With that good point Why would Microsoft write a whole new browser, that they will not sell and make no direct profit off of, when they could re-tool a uniamiously decided better browesr into their own, for less work, and thusly less money? Or at the very least use Gecko as their basic web rendering engine and add all thir stuff on top. So they realy can claim full compatibality with other browsers and standards, as well as keep all their functionality. In truth we have heard very little about what MS intends to do with Longhorn IE. it would not suprise me at all if they did this and clamed they they are friendly to all open source software, and at the same time CR the shit out of everything they added preventing others from doing the same.
I beleve what he ment was that EXT3 (and none others I can think of atm but i'm sure there are some) don't need to be manualy defragmented at all. The FS handles fragmentation dynamicaly as files are created and deleted. Any FS can be defragmented by moving files around on the disk. But the file system dosen't actualy do it, a seprate program does.
Not completly true. The origonal intent was to have WinFS work over netowrked machines so you could use detabase searches to find info acros your entire network. MS realised that would more complicated then their time table allowed (flexable as we all know it is anyway). Their solution was to leave that part out. WinFS will only work on the local machine. This means buisnesses cant use it. but it is still fully functional for individual home users.
This is simply the begining. When Television was introduced. Radio was the "Entertainment Meidum King". At the time you gad Great Radio!. Real shows with people voice acting, and using all maner of thing to emulate sounds. Basicaly TV withought the picture. As more and more people bought Televisions fewer people listened to Radio. Radios eventualy got used to making less money and offering diffrent programing, A.K.A. Pop Music. Just now Broadband Inter it reaching that critical mass where it is offering people a better alternative to things a diffrent entertainment meidum does(tv). I'm not saying that a 12% in young male viewers is becouse of the net. I think there are other causes, like women centric programing becoming dominate, do to advirtiser pressure. A far as News and information is consirned The internet is far better a distrobution network than anyother alternatives. But the people who are realyinterested in the "News" information are also generaly the most consertive consumers and are slower to migrate to a new medium. (maby) As was mentioned Spike TV shows many lout flashy comirtals that use techniques you would to the the atension of a child, becouse like it or not young men are more like children than any demographic other than thildren. Anybody who dosent beleve it has never atended a super bowl party and therefor has an un-informed opinon. This transition is not yet realy eveidant however it has none the less begun. It will probiblytake close to annother 5 years before anybody important realises this and tries to do somthing about it. It will be at least another decade before the transition is over. but in 20 years TV will be like radio today, And entertainment will on demand based via the interet. whare you have a Distrobution company that runs the servers and hosts various shows. The Distrobuter will charge viewersd and advertisers, and pay content makers like TV today. The content makers might live with that (like most) or they can also gain other income through product placement (like a few). Then the "Viewers" will pay the distroubters for streaming the shows, individualy or as a "season pass" or even a full pass that lets you watch anything you want whenever you want. --
OnDemand channels they might be offering for free for a few months. But Time warner does charge extra for them beyond the standard HBO packages.
but it is still well worth paying fot vs. a Torrent DL. Espicaly when you add suround sound and a 60" tv.
Yes this is somthing Microsoft should have done but didn't.
Some industrius emploies started the windows power tools in their spare time. Then Microsoft took the idea and ran with it. Making them an offical unsupported product.
I think it's strange no IE staff thought it would be a good idea to try the same with the IE's standards issues. Were they stopped by microsoft?
Or am I just a conspiracy theorist.
My question would be what version of windows are they using? Granted I was raised on computers, but my Windows XP machine has had uptimes in excess of 2 months.(only truned off by choice)
I use it for everything from video and graphic editing, to eMail and word processing, Web design and Winamp all simultainsouly. SETI@home using any extra cycles the processor might have left. Defrags and automated backups to a windows 2000 box (when a movie isn't compiling) happen every week.
I agree holeheartedly that all previous versions had to be rebooted daily even if only as a preventive measure to keep them from crashing.
I am in no way loyal to Microshit. I never use Media player or IE they both are reletive shite compaired to other *Free* options. I have tried Linux 3 times over the past few years, I probibly will again with Mandrake 10. It keeps getting better every time I try, I hope (but doubt) this time it will be good enough to perminatly switch.
Not to mention that their still isn't anything better on the imedate horizon
--