Windows Mobile phones have no restrictions on the software you can run, and as far as I know, there haven't been any viruses or security issues. Even if there HAVE been, they have to be obscure, and limited to people who installed specific, weird applications.
Windows Mobile phones are SO much better than an iPhone for *actually doing stuff* that it isn't even funny. There are REAL applications for Windows Mobile phones, because anyone can make an app. The only thing the iPhone has going for it is, well, I don't know what it has going for it. Pretty icons?
I like the hardware. I like the fact that it runs Linux, and uses SD cards for games. The whole design philosophy behind the console is great.
But $380? Are they out of their fucking MINDS? The hardware is WEAK compared to a 360, PS3, or even a Wii.
This thing could be successful if they sold it for $200. But at $380, there is NO WAY anyone is going to buy it.
That's the problem with getting into the console business- you have to be able to produce/sell the hardware in enormous quantities so you can get the price down. This company obviously can't do that, so they're paying (almost) retail prices for the hardware. Which means they're fucked.
Well, he probably *is* just like other politicians.
However...
He's only been in office for a 2 month! How much could he do/not do in 8 weeks? Not very much.
The whole "Obama has broken his promises" thing is basically nothing but something Republicans babble about because they are sore losers. Not that the Democrats aren't sore losers, too, but you have to learn to wade through the bullshit.
While I think the "Pirate Bay" guys are legally in the clear, it doesn't really matter.
In the current economic/political climate, and with the United States pushing HARD on copyright issues worldwide (and with President Obama even *more* firmly in the pocket of the big media companies than Bush was), the "Pirate Bay" is almost surely going to lose this case.
"Incidentally, if every household [statistics.gov.uk] in the UK did pay this fee it would come to about £433,000,000. That's less than half of the music industry's current revenue [timesonline.co.uk], and the proposed UK tax includes films too."
Yeah, but that's £433,000,000 for *providing NO product or service*. They simply get a check.
Why should the music industry get a "yearly fee" from everyone with an internet connection? What if you never download music?
Never mind that if the music industry actually managed to make this happen, they could essentially STOP making music. Why would they bother? They'd be making billions of dollars a year on the *fees*!
A tax (because that's what it is) to keep an industry that produces entertainment/luxury products in business? Fuck that. It's total insanity, and if it ever does happen, the end of the world is near. Seriously.
Well, Exchange is *part* of the reason people get locked into MS products. But the bigger reason, by far, is Active Directory.
AD *works*. It's easy. It integrates seamlessly with Windows. The management tools are good, and easy to use. There are tons of third-party products that integrate with it. Seamlessly.
The current LDAP/Kerberos/Samba situation is a fucking MESS. It's unusable in a production environment. It's hard to manage. It doesn't have GROUP POLICIES, for Christ's sake.
Samba 4 supposedly fixes some of these problems, but I doubt it comes even CLOSE to providing all the functionality of a genuine Windows Server OS.
THAT is why people are locked into MS products. They simply work better than the alternatives in many cases, especially on a corporate LAN.
I've messed with the so-called "Active Directory replacements". They all suck.
The fact is, if you are using Windows clients, Active Directory works, it's simple, and you'd be fucking CRAZY to try to use anything else. Save yourself some pain, and blow $1000 (pounds, whatever) on Server 2003 or 2008.
Seriously. You don't want to do this. It's a fucking nightmare to try to support a Windows domain without a real, genuine Microsoft domain controller.
The one true advantage he has, is that he doesn't seem concerned about pleasing people. That goes a LONG way.
He needs to be replaced by someone that isn't concerned with their own press, and with what the shareholders think, and what the tech industry in general thinks. They need someone that is their own person, and not simply a mouthpiece for the shareholders and other upper-level managers.
I think a lot of companies suffer from insidious "group-think", and Apple has avoided that, probably because of Jobs. I get the impression that he is not above calling someone stupid, and stomping on other managers/employees that don't contribute anything except ideas on how best to preserve the status quo. The irony is, Apple's *customers* are very much into the "group think" thing. But at least they are "group-thinking differently".
Seriously. At this point, it's fairly obvious that Microsoft is going to be creating an all-new version of Windows that breaks backward-compatibility, and runs all the old stuff in a VM. As long as they release a new version of Office for the new OS, they won't lose much market share.
Honestly, that's the best of both worlds. The old Windows cruft goes away, but old apps keep working until they can be re-written.
Re-writing apps is hard, and that's what has kept Windows from *truly* evolving. Yeah, major commercial apps get re-written pretty quickly, but it's all those unique "business critical" apps that have been created by low-paid, inexperienced, in-house programmers that never get updated. Too many companies depend on those things, so MS has kept that junk running, at the expense of actually making Windows better.
As for Linux and MacOS, well, until they get something like Active Directory and Group Policies working, they aren't really what you want on a corporate network. MacOS and Linux are MUCH more difficult to manage. Yeah, at the actual workstation-level, things are easier to configure, but doing mass configuration of lots of machines is a hassle. There are no good GUI tools, and no real standard tools in general. It can be done, but it's too difficult.
I think that the rise of the browser and "intranet" apps has reduced the need for generic office applications to a large degree. 10 years ago, making a networked application with a database backend was an expensive and difficult proposition. Now, not so much. Most businesses that know what they're doing have moved to completely database-driven stuff, where employees do nothing but fill out forms all day. You still have the occasional need for custom documents, but most employees won't ever need to create a new Word document, or Excel document. And Access, well, nobody should use Access. PowerPoint, however, seems like it will never die, unfortunately.
Seriously, they are *notorious* for this kind of bullshit. How many bridges do they have left to burn? Not many, I would think. I think they've pissed off all the Tier 1 and Tier 2 providers at this point.
Screw them.
"Will 2009 be the first year of the E-President?"
on
The First E-President
·
· Score: 5, Funny
If the "E" stands for "ebony", then yeah, probably.
"With that said, the ONLY reason I would even think of switching to Vista is because it supports video hardware acceleration for the desktop. I just wish I could find an application to do that on XP."
Uh, yeah. EVERY video card made in the past, oh, 15 years or so does GDI acceleration. Which is what Windows XP uses.
So your desktop is already accelerated. In XP, anyway.
Oddly enough, in Vista, if you switch to the "classic" desktop look (i.e., the Windows 2000 look), you don't get GDI acceleration. Your main CPU is doing all the work. As far as I know, there is NO GDI acceleration in Vista.
I pretty much agree with you that Vista is slow, though. XP had the same problem, however. I would say it wasn't until late 2003 that XP started to feel fast on contemporary low-to-medium-powered hardware. So maybe that means by spring of 2009, Vista will feel snappy on your average $500 machine. Of course, a lot of the perceived slowness is because of the increase in the number of clicks it takes to do a lot of things. I don't see that changing, unfortunately.
Yes, the big-iron SANs cost a lot. Too much. But you can build your own for not that much money. Yeah, you lose some of the cool management features. But so what? They're so cheap, that for the price of one commercial SAN, you can build TEN of the things.
Unless you *really* need the performance of expensive drives, SATA drives are fine. Most companies don't need super-fast storage, they just need enough to saturate their network. And they needs LOTS of space. It's just storage, man.
Slashdot Mirror
Because without Macs, there wouldn't be any homosexuals shopping on Amazon at all, and this whole fiasco would've never been discovered.
Windows Mobile phones have no restrictions on the software you can run, and as far as I know, there haven't been any viruses or security issues. Even if there HAVE been, they have to be obscure, and limited to people who installed specific, weird applications.
Windows Mobile phones are SO much better than an iPhone for *actually doing stuff* that it isn't even funny. There are REAL applications for Windows Mobile phones, because anyone can make an app. The only thing the iPhone has going for it is, well, I don't know what it has going for it. Pretty icons?
Remember, this was a screening attended by trekkies and Harry Knowles-type movie dorks. These aren't people that know what a good movie is.
Hell, the trailers for the new Trek movie seem to indicate that Abrams took inspiration from - God help us - the Star Wars prequels.
It'll suck. Like almost all science-fiction movies from the past 15 or 20 years. And I'm a sci-fi fan.
I like the hardware. I like the fact that it runs Linux, and uses SD cards for games. The whole design philosophy behind the console is great.
But $380? Are they out of their fucking MINDS? The hardware is WEAK compared to a 360, PS3, or even a Wii.
This thing could be successful if they sold it for $200. But at $380, there is NO WAY anyone is going to buy it.
That's the problem with getting into the console business- you have to be able to produce/sell the hardware in enormous quantities so you can get the price down. This company obviously can't do that, so they're paying (almost) retail prices for the hardware. Which means they're fucked.
Well, yes.
And don't forget NoScript.
The thing is, with Adblock and NoScript, browsing on Firefox *is* faster than on any other browser. A
Well, he probably *is* just like other politicians.
However...
He's only been in office for a 2 month! How much could he do/not do in 8 weeks? Not very much.
The whole "Obama has broken his promises" thing is basically nothing but something Republicans babble about because they are sore losers. Not that the Democrats aren't sore losers, too, but you have to learn to wade through the bullshit.
It's that England is a hellhole. And the big cities, especially, are just awful.
Everything is old and dirty and depressing in England. And, frankly, they like it that way. But it does start to affect the populace after a while.
Exactly.
I would walk out TODAY. Because fuck them for trying to play mind games with you.
Seriously. No backup? At all?
Of course, it's not like it matters. I've never heard of ma.gnolia, and I doubt very many other people have. This dumbass gets what he deserves.
While I think the "Pirate Bay" guys are legally in the clear, it doesn't really matter.
In the current economic/political climate, and with the United States pushing HARD on copyright issues worldwide (and with President Obama even *more* firmly in the pocket of the big media companies than Bush was), the "Pirate Bay" is almost surely going to lose this case.
Hope for a miracle, is my advice.
"Incidentally, if every household [statistics.gov.uk] in the UK did pay this fee it would come to about £433,000,000. That's less than half of the music industry's current revenue [timesonline.co.uk], and the proposed UK tax includes films too."
Yeah, but that's £433,000,000 for *providing NO product or service*. They simply get a check.
I think they would be pretty happy with that.
No, it's a NIGHTMARE.
Why should the music industry get a "yearly fee" from everyone with an internet connection? What if you never download music?
Never mind that if the music industry actually managed to make this happen, they could essentially STOP making music. Why would they bother? They'd be making billions of dollars a year on the *fees*!
A tax (because that's what it is) to keep an industry that produces entertainment/luxury products in business? Fuck that. It's total insanity, and if it ever does happen, the end of the world is near. Seriously.
Well, Exchange is *part* of the reason people get locked into MS products. But the bigger reason, by far, is Active Directory.
AD *works*. It's easy. It integrates seamlessly with Windows. The management tools are good, and easy to use. There are tons of third-party products that integrate with it. Seamlessly.
The current LDAP/Kerberos/Samba situation is a fucking MESS. It's unusable in a production environment. It's hard to manage. It doesn't have GROUP POLICIES, for Christ's sake.
Samba 4 supposedly fixes some of these problems, but I doubt it comes even CLOSE to providing all the functionality of a genuine Windows Server OS.
THAT is why people are locked into MS products. They simply work better than the alternatives in many cases, especially on a corporate LAN.
I've messed with the so-called "Active Directory replacements". They all suck.
The fact is, if you are using Windows clients, Active Directory works, it's simple, and you'd be fucking CRAZY to try to use anything else. Save yourself some pain, and blow $1000 (pounds, whatever) on Server 2003 or 2008.
Seriously. You don't want to do this. It's a fucking nightmare to try to support a Windows domain without a real, genuine Microsoft domain controller.
Did I mention this is a bad idea?
"Say... your body just starts literally killing ALL cells... cancer and normal... "
How do you think chemotherapy works? Or radiation therapy?
Both treatments kill *all* cells. The idea is to kill the cancer cells *first*, before the treatment kills the patient.
The one true advantage he has, is that he doesn't seem concerned about pleasing people. That goes a LONG way.
He needs to be replaced by someone that isn't concerned with their own press, and with what the shareholders think, and what the tech industry in general thinks. They need someone that is their own person, and not simply a mouthpiece for the shareholders and other upper-level managers.
I think a lot of companies suffer from insidious "group-think", and Apple has avoided that, probably because of Jobs. I get the impression that he is not above calling someone stupid, and stomping on other managers/employees that don't contribute anything except ideas on how best to preserve the status quo. The irony is, Apple's *customers* are very much into the "group think" thing. But at least they are "group-thinking differently".
I prefer teal CAs, myself. Or possibly burnt sienna CAs. Sometimes fuschia CAs.
It's ROGUE you dumbass.
Seriously. At this point, it's fairly obvious that Microsoft is going to be creating an all-new version of Windows that breaks backward-compatibility, and runs all the old stuff in a VM. As long as they release a new version of Office for the new OS, they won't lose much market share.
Honestly, that's the best of both worlds. The old Windows cruft goes away, but old apps keep working until they can be re-written.
Re-writing apps is hard, and that's what has kept Windows from *truly* evolving. Yeah, major commercial apps get re-written pretty quickly, but it's all those unique "business critical" apps that have been created by low-paid, inexperienced, in-house programmers that never get updated. Too many companies depend on those things, so MS has kept that junk running, at the expense of actually making Windows better.
As for Linux and MacOS, well, until they get something like Active Directory and Group Policies working, they aren't really what you want on a corporate network. MacOS and Linux are MUCH more difficult to manage. Yeah, at the actual workstation-level, things are easier to configure, but doing mass configuration of lots of machines is a hassle. There are no good GUI tools, and no real standard tools in general. It can be done, but it's too difficult.
Please don't use the term "CSMatt" when you mean to say "pedant".
There. I said it.
The characters are boring, the plot is boring, and Asimov's dialogue is juvenile at BEST.
Asimov is incredibly overrated. And the "Foundation" series is the most overrates sci-fi series there is. It's just terrible.
I've noticed the same thing.
I think that the rise of the browser and "intranet" apps has reduced the need for generic office applications to a large degree. 10 years ago, making a networked application with a database backend was an expensive and difficult proposition. Now, not so much. Most businesses that know what they're doing have moved to completely database-driven stuff, where employees do nothing but fill out forms all day. You still have the occasional need for custom documents, but most employees won't ever need to create a new Word document, or Excel document. And Access, well, nobody should use Access. PowerPoint, however, seems like it will never die, unfortunately.
Seriously, they are *notorious* for this kind of bullshit. How many bridges do they have left to burn? Not many, I would think. I think they've pissed off all the Tier 1 and Tier 2 providers at this point.
Screw them.
If the "E" stands for "ebony", then yeah, probably.
"With that said, the ONLY reason I would even think of switching to Vista is because it supports video hardware acceleration for the desktop. I just wish I could find an application to do that on XP."
Uh, yeah. EVERY video card made in the past, oh, 15 years or so does GDI acceleration. Which is what Windows XP uses.
So your desktop is already accelerated. In XP, anyway.
Oddly enough, in Vista, if you switch to the "classic" desktop look (i.e., the Windows 2000 look), you don't get GDI acceleration. Your main CPU is doing all the work. As far as I know, there is NO GDI acceleration in Vista.
I pretty much agree with you that Vista is slow, though. XP had the same problem, however. I would say it wasn't until late 2003 that XP started to feel fast on contemporary low-to-medium-powered hardware. So maybe that means by spring of 2009, Vista will feel snappy on your average $500 machine. Of course, a lot of the perceived slowness is because of the increase in the number of clicks it takes to do a lot of things. I don't see that changing, unfortunately.
You guys ever hear of OpenFiler?
Yes, the big-iron SANs cost a lot. Too much. But you can build your own for not that much money. Yeah, you lose some of the cool management features. But so what? They're so cheap, that for the price of one commercial SAN, you can build TEN of the things.
Unless you *really* need the performance of expensive drives, SATA drives are fine. Most companies don't need super-fast storage, they just need enough to saturate their network. And they needs LOTS of space. It's just storage, man.