Winodws comes with Notepad. However people had already heard of WordStar, WordPerfect and even Word, and knew that notepad is not a wordprocessor.
Windows comes with Paint. People can see that paint won't do what they want, and look for other tools.
Windwos comes with IE. People don't know that if they use it and Outlook Express, the will get spyware and viruses. So they don't look for other tools.
---
I have done technical support. When I directed a customer to a website, I would ask them to "open a webbrowser" or "go on the internet". More than 40% of the people I delt with, would ask what I ment, and would have to be directed to click on the "big blue E".
BTW, I have been on line long enough that my computer did not come with a TCP stack, dialup adapter or webbrowser. I found an internet provider, paid for the service, picked up the CD and installed the software myself. I lied, actually they had a bbs number so I could use the Windows 3.1 terminal program and use the xmodem protocol to download the files, but the CD was an option as well.
a) You don't HAVE to have a car for most jobs. You can car pool. Take the bus. Ride a bike. Walk. Even move closer to your job. It is assumed that you will be there on time, you can pay as little or as much for transportation as you want. That is your business.
They also can not dictate what you pay or how you get there. That is up to you.
b) It is usually standard in an industry if you pay for your own tools. Also note. You bring your tools, when you are no longer employed, you leave with your tools. Oh yeah, there is not a monthly charge associated with your tools.
In the IT industry, an employerer provided pager or cell phone is standard if you are to contacted outside of an 8 hour work shift. Also, one would hope that you negotiated a salary that would match for being on call.
So what it boils down to, is if they will pay me $100 more a month for me to take care of it, instead of the business picking up the expense. Means at some point, I will take a soaking on it, because the cost of the services I pay for go up or because the company freezes saleries at some point. Why is it my job to take the hit on it?
I have been out of work for an extended period of time, had to make radical changes to my lifestyle. Then I had to do what had to be done to get things going again.
However, I watch out for who I work for. I was "downsized" when the company I worked for closed their west coast office because, "it's cheaper to do things in Texas".
Where I worked, most people had been there over 10 years, and knew their job, why they did it and how it affected the other jobs (which they had been cross trained in). They pay was good.
Meanwhile back in Texas, people came to work at 8:04 am went to lunch at 11:56, came back at 1:04 and left at 4:58. They were traied to do one job. They don't know why the are doining it, if they are doining it right, or how it impacts anything else if it works or not. They make little better than minimun wage.
I have heard it called "The Wally Factor".
A company either wants a building full of "Wallies" that can be replaced for $8.00 an hour like a module. Any Wally can be plugged into any job and be trained to do it in a day or two. No skill or expertise required. Just dont' expect Wally to understand why he does it. He is paid to push the button 8 hours a day. Who knows what the button does?
A good company does not want Wallies. They want to pay a decent wage for the services of an employee that brings a skill set that allows them to do a good job for them. This includes knowing what is going on.
I won't work for a company that wants to call me Wally. Or in other words, I am as loyal and hard working for a company as they are loyal to me.
I.E. if they would close the plant on me with 30 minutes notice. I am willing to walk out on them mid shift to find a real job.
It may take me a while longer to find a job. However, I end up working for an employer who knows they are getting a good value for what they pay me. I am a professional.
If you don't recognize the value I bring to your company, then why would I want to work for you? So you can tell me how hard it is to find another job and treat me like crap and tell me I am lucky?
I am sorry. My employer is lucky to have a staff of people who are profesional and know how to get the job done, no matter what is thrown at us. They can take it out of their 60% markup on their product.
But you go ahead and keep that attitude. If you don't realize that you are an equal party negotiating for your services with a party who is no better than you are. Then they are going to pass you up, and hire someone like me. I am more than happy to see you go and take that job for $8.00 an hour that I just said "no" to.
Microsoft said from the start that ActiveX was secure. It took 8 years for the first big hole to come and bite them in the butt.
Microsoft has an ActiveX control that turns out to have a security exploit in it. They have released an updated control that has been patched.
The problem is, if you have "Always Trust Microsoft" checked, a webiste can force you to download the old, insecure ActiveX control, and then take advantage of the exploit.
Microsoft's solution, never check "Always Trust MicroSoft".
So my gut instinct was correct 8 years ago......
And yet, after being patched for six years, IE is still a such security risk, CERT has issued a warning.
IE has been patching for six years, and is closed source so hackers can't look at the code, they can only probe from the outside.
Mozilla/Firefox is open source, you can look at the source code. Hell, you can even try to submit your own backend or introduce your own secuirty bug. Yet it is more secure than IE.
I agree, you would think the stable product being patched should be more secure than the product with features beind added to it.
However, the actual track records show a different story.
The reason IE is so insecure is the fact that Microsoft was levraging it's monopoly.
IE, is so inscure because of the way Microsoft leveraged their monopoly to try an take over the internet.
The PC industry was growing fast enough, that if only some users of Netscape switched, AND all new PC's were sold with IE on them, they would be able to win the browser war.
That was a given for Microsoft. They would win. So the question was, what to do with the win?
Perpetuate the monopoly and hijack the internet. ActiveX will only run on windows. Let's make a world where all websites that matter, use ActiveX. Let's break standards so that websites that work in IE, won't work well in other browsers. We have enough programmers, that we cna hijack the standards and everone else will play catchup.
So by adding ActiveX, making the user experience easy and good looking, with security as a side note, Mircosoft created IE, which by the way had to be intergrated into the OS as a pretence so that the Department of Justice could not ask them to remove it for a default windows install.
The browser is really a few dll's that anyone can use to manipulate html. So it's strenghts are your strenghts, and it's weaknesses are your weaknesses. The file explorer, Internet Explorer, Outlook Epxress, are all built on an intregrated together via these DLL's.
You can use a secuirty weakness in any one component aganist the others.
Time has proven that ActiveX and breaking web standards was a bad idea that is only now starting not to pay off for Microsoft.
"It runs on windows" is what has made microsoft. Developer lock in to the win API is needed. So yes, development tools will continue to improve as long as developers may be tempted to move to another OS.
I have worked in production typing environments. I have done legal documents, technical documentation, user manuals, etc.
I have never once had word perfect "eat" a document. I don't care if the doucment was 1 page, 1000 pages, lots of graphics, 50 mb on disk. WordPefect has never eaten my document, or anyone else I have worked with documents. It works fine with large documents or container/sub document type projects.
That is in either DOS or Windows
On the other hand. I have seen documents FUBARed by MS word on many occasions. Pages disapear, graphics do strange things.
Word is ***unstable****, there is no other way to describe it. It is also quirky, but that is another story.
A lot of it, is a lack of depth and understanding.
My first web page (not site) was done in Netscape 1.x.
I remember bitching when there were more things to learn when Netscape 2 came out.
Most developers do not have a firm grasp on how the www works.
Was designed to render in ANY browser
That browser may be text based
That browser my not support any font attributes.
Your text will be rendered in a text area of arbritrary size, the end users browser, not the author of the page has control over how the page renders.
Firmly grasp the concept of open tags and closed tags
Then understand what is possible with the html 1 spec
Then learn how to add html 2 attributes to your page, and do so, in a manner that they fail gracefully on a browser that only supports html 1
Then learn to add html 3 attributes and css level 1 attributes and how to have them gracefully fail on browsers that only support html 2 or html 1 spec.
Learn how to make your fonts cross-browser compatible. I.E. so they render at a viewable size under default settings on IE Windows/Mac, as well as with geco based browers.
Now, keeping in mind that some people are on dial up, or are using text only browers, start to do all your page layout with css 1.
Most "web developers" have never coded for the html 1.0 spec. The do not understand that a web browser was originally designed to render content, not deliver adverising and pixpel perfect rendered graphical pages.
If you understand what is in each html spec and how these features were added, it is not to bad creating comaptible pages.
The problem with MS pushing back the release date, is how it hurts others in the market.
Don't switch to product X, we will have all the features product X has, plus more. Then product X suffers bad sales, for the next year or two, and goes out of business.
Then to top it off, MS does not implement the features of product X, or only some of the features.
There is no great comfort in Microsoft taking its time. The FUD they will generate in the mean time more than makes up for any benefit.
Drop the MCF stuff and try coding a toolbar by following the Microsoft docs.
I have. The original documentation was written back in the days of Win 95. They updated the code for C++. And they left a mistake in there. The toolbar data structure has a 2 byte unused field in it that is NOT DOCUMENTED by Micorosoft. They have updated the information at least 3 times in the last 8 years. And it is still wrong.
Try loading a bitmap from a file on Windows CE. Look at Microsoft's documentation. Read their book on develpment. Then write and compile the program. It compiles fine. Then run it, and poof, it crashes. Turns out they did not implement the function in CE. There is 1 fscking article that can be googled out of the MS newsgroups on it.
I will soon be porting an app to Palm. And I am SO looking forward to woking with documentation that is better than Microsofts.
The only thing that saves them. Is when their documentation is wrong, their header and include files save your butt.
Then why not the top 100 serials? Why not the top 250? Why not the top 500?
Are they encouraging piracy by blocking only the top 20?
If I was trying to do this, I would block 1 or 2 thousand serials, and make up some crap about intellegent serial filtering being built in. Not block the top 20.
I have been up for 20 hours and feel too lazy to google it out for you.
In a nutshell, take a box, put Windows 2003 on it, have some engineers from Microsoft come out, tweak the box, filesystem, registry, services etc for optimal performance serving static web pages, then blast those pages out to an intranet.
Then take a box, put RHE on it, get an 11 page document on optimizing linux for serving web pages, and follow all of the instructions on page 1 only. Leave services running, do NOT tune the file system.
In a nutshell, Microsoft paid to have a 3rd party run a web server under the conditions where Microsoft would perform the best and Linux would perform the worst, and then tune the web servers even further to make sure that would be the case.
It would be like us having a race, both of us with the same make and model of car, and I hire a professional driver, and have the car tuned up by a professional pit crew, and you take yours to jiffy lube and have your grandmother drive. Would you be surprised that my car outperformed yours?
Yes, NT is not built on the 95/98/ME code base. But look at it's track record.
When ease of use and speed are issues, they will move code into kerenl space that does not belong there.
There are things they can not take out, or it breaks compatibility with the NT code base as well as the 95 code base.
Can you secure a XP box? Sure if you really know what your doing. You have to download or purchase a lot of stuff and stay on top of security. Most users can't, even if they rely on Microsoft Update, their system is still not secure.
Microsoft were security geniuses, they designed the ActiveX control.
They allowed the developer to sign there own control, which was not really smart.
But they had the feature of you being confirming you want a new control downloaded and installed. However, you could check the "Yes" always box for a particular provider.
Microsoft swore up and down, that this would not be crackable. So much so, they recommended that you could and SHOULD check the "Yes" always trust Microsoft box. It was only there in the first place to prevent a public outcry from us Anal Rentive privacy freaks.
Well about a year ago, there was a Microsoft ActiveX control with a secruity flaw found in it. Since it is Microsofts Control, I can set my website to send your browser the broken version and take advantage of the security hole. If you selected the "Yes" checkmark, it will download without you knowing it and I can expoloit your system.
Microsoft did not design a way to revoke signatures. So it is not possible to prevent an older ActiveX control from downloading over a newer one. Or an insecure one from downloading over a patched one.
Microsoft's solution. There are too many webistes that rely on MS signed ActiveX controls. So the solution is to make sure that you never check the "Yes always" box for MicoroSoft, others may still be OK (like Adobe), and decide each time if the control is something that should be downloaded.
So yes I will bash, and no, I don't trust them when they say that they have secured something.
Considering how MS office documents tend to corrupt.
Rule of Thumb: If an excel spreadsheet has computations that are so complex, you need a mainframe or cluster to run them in a timely maner. Then your data is in some serious danger.
The next time I download something from the internet on Windows 2000/2003 or XP, should I check the "yes" box for "Always trust content from Micorsoft?
That is all that needs to be said on Microsoft security and why I feel free to post about windows crashing, secuirty and annoyances.
Good, every programmer they take off of longhorn, or.net gives us a little more breathing room for open source software to improve and take marketshare/mindshare from Microsoft
Do I sound bitter? I guess it is because I think I should own my computer. Paying to license software, for the most part is a game, especially if there is built in obsolence. I also expect there should be a way to open up a document I created 10 years ago.
I do not mind the thought of living in a world where Micosoft does not hold a monopoly, and will play nice because it is in its best interest.
I fear to live in a world where Microsoft has there way, renting software on a monthly basis, Micorsoft determins what software I can run, what files I can open and what content that is mine I can have access to.
We should all hope we someday live in a world where Microsoft is a player, not a monopoly
Maybe so, but you cannot say he's done no good, he made nearly the entire world's desktop consistent.
start linux troll mode -------------
A consistent and open standards for sharing data and information interchange is GOOD.
A consistant user interface is GOOD.
Having ~93% of the desktop systems on the planet having the same security holes, having many of them, and having more discoverd every day, some of which can not really be plugged is BAD.
Having closed standards and basterdized standards is BAD
----------------end linux troll mode
Windows may not be your cup of tea but lets look at the good points and bad points when things like this are posted and use facts if we want to make fun.
Ok, lets start with bad points
Microsoft OS's core was designed to run on a single user system with that user operating with administrative privilages.Networking was straped on top of that. Security was added after that. Copmatibility with older MS systems and API's were such a priority, that the things needed to make the system secure can't be added.
Every time Microsoft tightens security, it seems 10 more holes are found.
Support, how large of team does Microsoft has with experience running clusted computer systems based on a Microsoft OS? Do you want to pay for them to come up to speed?
CPU license requirements and all the BS needed to keep them current.
Vendor lock in
Software designed to take advantage of a clustered environment. Where is all the experience at, writing it for *nix or Windows?
The system registry, a bad idea no matter how many processors you run.
Needing to run a cluster with AntiVirus software
People that know how to operate clusterd environments have *nix expereince and are used to using *nix tools, not looking for the registry tweeks to fix system problems.
What are the advantages
No one was ever fired for using Microsoft?
Have a major vendor to place blame on and as a resource for support.
Easy to interface with Widndows desktops
scalability ???
Hardware support ????
speed ????
I would wonder what besides a new CS building built by the Gates Foundation could induce a computer lab to use HPC for clustering or mainframes.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows comes with Paint. People can see that paint won't do what they want, and look for other tools.
Windwos comes with IE. People don't know that if they use it and Outlook Express, the will get spyware and viruses. So they don't look for other tools.
---
I have done technical support. When I directed a customer to a website, I would ask them to "open a webbrowser" or "go on the internet". More than 40% of the people I delt with, would ask what I ment, and would have to be directed to click on the "big blue E".
BTW, I have been on line long enough that my computer did not come with a TCP stack, dialup adapter or webbrowser. I found an internet provider, paid for the service, picked up the CD and installed the software myself. I lied, actually they had a bbs number so I could use the Windows 3.1 terminal program and use the xmodem protocol to download the files, but the CD was an option as well.
-------
They also can not dictate what you pay or how you get there. That is up to you.
b) It is usually standard in an industry if you pay for your own tools. Also note. You bring your tools, when you are no longer employed, you leave with your tools. Oh yeah, there is not a monthly charge associated with your tools.
In the IT industry, an employerer provided pager or cell phone is standard if you are to contacted outside of an 8 hour work shift. Also, one would hope that you negotiated a salary that would match for being on call.
So what it boils down to, is if they will pay me $100 more a month for me to take care of it, instead of the business picking up the expense. Means at some point, I will take a soaking on it, because the cost of the services I pay for go up or because the company freezes saleries at some point. Why is it my job to take the hit on it?
-------
However, I watch out for who I work for. I was "downsized" when the company I worked for closed their west coast office because, "it's cheaper to do things in Texas".
Where I worked, most people had been there over 10 years, and knew their job, why they did it and how it affected the other jobs (which they had been cross trained in). They pay was good.
Meanwhile back in Texas, people came to work at 8:04 am went to lunch at 11:56, came back at 1:04 and left at 4:58. They were traied to do one job. They don't know why the are doining it, if they are doining it right, or how it impacts anything else if it works or not. They make little better than minimun wage.
I have heard it called "The Wally Factor".
A company either wants a building full of "Wallies" that can be replaced for $8.00 an hour like a module. Any Wally can be plugged into any job and be trained to do it in a day or two. No skill or expertise required. Just dont' expect Wally to understand why he does it. He is paid to push the button 8 hours a day. Who knows what the button does?
A good company does not want Wallies. They want to pay a decent wage for the services of an employee that brings a skill set that allows them to do a good job for them. This includes knowing what is going on.
I won't work for a company that wants to call me Wally. Or in other words, I am as loyal and hard working for a company as they are loyal to me.
I.E. if they would close the plant on me with 30 minutes notice. I am willing to walk out on them mid shift to find a real job.
It may take me a while longer to find a job. However, I end up working for an employer who knows they are getting a good value for what they pay me. I am a professional.
If you don't recognize the value I bring to your company, then why would I want to work for you? So you can tell me how hard it is to find another job and treat me like crap and tell me I am lucky?
I am sorry. My employer is lucky to have a staff of people who are profesional and know how to get the job done, no matter what is thrown at us. They can take it out of their 60% markup on their product.
But you go ahead and keep that attitude. If you don't realize that you are an equal party negotiating for your services with a party who is no better than you are. Then they are going to pass you up, and hire someone like me. I am more than happy to see you go and take that job for $8.00 an hour that I just said "no" to.
--------
Microsoft said from the start that ActiveX was secure. It took 8 years for the first big hole to come and bite them in the butt. Microsoft has an ActiveX control that turns out to have a security exploit in it. They have released an updated control that has been patched. The problem is, if you have "Always Trust Microsoft" checked, a webiste can force you to download the old, insecure ActiveX control, and then take advantage of the exploit. Microsoft's solution, never check "Always Trust MicroSoft". So my gut instinct was correct 8 years ago......
And yet, after being patched for six years, IE is still a such security risk, CERT has issued a warning. IE has been patching for six years, and is closed source so hackers can't look at the code, they can only probe from the outside. Mozilla/Firefox is open source, you can look at the source code. Hell, you can even try to submit your own backend or introduce your own secuirty bug. Yet it is more secure than IE. I agree, you would think the stable product being patched should be more secure than the product with features beind added to it. However, the actual track records show a different story.
The reason IE is so insecure is the fact that Microsoft was levraging it's monopoly. IE, is so inscure because of the way Microsoft leveraged their monopoly to try an take over the internet. The PC industry was growing fast enough, that if only some users of Netscape switched, AND all new PC's were sold with IE on them, they would be able to win the browser war. That was a given for Microsoft. They would win. So the question was, what to do with the win? Perpetuate the monopoly and hijack the internet. ActiveX will only run on windows. Let's make a world where all websites that matter, use ActiveX. Let's break standards so that websites that work in IE, won't work well in other browsers. We have enough programmers, that we cna hijack the standards and everone else will play catchup. So by adding ActiveX, making the user experience easy and good looking, with security as a side note, Mircosoft created IE, which by the way had to be intergrated into the OS as a pretence so that the Department of Justice could not ask them to remove it for a default windows install. The browser is really a few dll's that anyone can use to manipulate html. So it's strenghts are your strenghts, and it's weaknesses are your weaknesses. The file explorer, Internet Explorer, Outlook Epxress, are all built on an intregrated together via these DLL's. You can use a secuirty weakness in any one component aganist the others. Time has proven that ActiveX and breaking web standards was a bad idea that is only now starting not to pay off for Microsoft.
"It runs on windows" is what has made microsoft. Developer lock in to the win API is needed. So yes, development tools will continue to improve as long as developers may be tempted to move to another OS.
--------------
I have never once had word perfect "eat" a document. I don't care if the doucment was 1 page, 1000 pages, lots of graphics, 50 mb on disk. WordPefect has never eaten my document, or anyone else I have worked with documents. It works fine with large documents or container/sub document type projects.
That is in either DOS or Windows
On the other hand. I have seen documents FUBARed by MS word on many occasions. Pages disapear, graphics do strange things.
Word is ***unstable****, there is no other way to describe it. It is also quirky, but that is another story.
------
My first web page (not site) was done in Netscape 1.x.
I remember bitching when there were more things to learn when Netscape 2 came out.
Most developers do not have a firm grasp on how the www works.
- Was designed to render in ANY browser
- That browser may be text based
- That browser my not support any font attributes.
- Your text will be rendered in a text area of arbritrary size, the end users browser, not the author of the page has control over how the page renders.
- Firmly grasp the concept of open tags and closed tags
- Then understand what is possible with the html 1 spec
- Then learn how to add html 2 attributes to your page, and do so, in a manner that they fail gracefully on a browser that only supports html 1
- Then learn to add html 3 attributes and css level 1 attributes and how to have them gracefully fail on browsers that only support html 2 or html 1 spec.
- Learn how to make your fonts cross-browser compatible. I.E. so they render at a viewable size under default settings on IE Windows/Mac, as well as with geco based browers.
- Now, keeping in mind that some people are on dial up, or are using text only browers, start to do all your page layout with css 1.
Most "web developers" have never coded for the html 1.0 spec. The do not understand that a web browser was originally designed to render content, not deliver adverising and pixpel perfect rendered graphical pages.If you understand what is in each html spec and how these features were added, it is not to bad creating comaptible pages.
------------
Don't switch to product X, we will have all the features product X has, plus more. Then product X suffers bad sales, for the next year or two, and goes out of business.
Then to top it off, MS does not implement the features of product X, or only some of the features.
There is no great comfort in Microsoft taking its time. The FUD they will generate in the mean time more than makes up for any benefit.
I have. The original documentation was written back in the days of Win 95. They updated the code for C++. And they left a mistake in there. The toolbar data structure has a 2 byte unused field in it that is NOT DOCUMENTED by Micorosoft. They have updated the information at least 3 times in the last 8 years. And it is still wrong.
Try loading a bitmap from a file on Windows CE. Look at Microsoft's documentation. Read their book on develpment. Then write and compile the program. It compiles fine. Then run it, and poof, it crashes. Turns out they did not implement the function in CE. There is 1 fscking article that can be googled out of the MS newsgroups on it.
I will soon be porting an app to Palm. And I am SO looking forward to woking with documentation that is better than Microsofts.
The only thing that saves them. Is when their documentation is wrong, their header and include files save your butt.
---------
Governments merly have the opprotunity to recognize or ignore these "truths"
I.E. "we believe these truths to be self evident"
--------
Cheap as in having to purchase Anti-virus software
Cheap as in having to become an expert on spyware and hijackware to keep their system clean
Cheap as in paying someone to clean up their box every six months.
Cheap as in, I don't want to pay to have my box fixed, I will just reformat the drive, lose most of my data and start over again.
------------
We are talking about the average older American's perception of IBM.
Move on now, no need to troll here
------------------
Are they encouraging piracy by blocking only the top 20?
If I was trying to do this, I would block 1 or 2 thousand serials, and make up some crap about intellegent serial filtering being built in. Not block the top 20.
-------------
In a nutshell, take a box, put Windows 2003 on it, have some engineers from Microsoft come out, tweak the box, filesystem, registry, services etc for optimal performance serving static web pages, then blast those pages out to an intranet.
Then take a box, put RHE on it, get an 11 page document on optimizing linux for serving web pages, and follow all of the instructions on page 1 only. Leave services running, do NOT tune the file system.
In a nutshell, Microsoft paid to have a 3rd party run a web server under the conditions where Microsoft would perform the best and Linux would perform the worst, and then tune the web servers even further to make sure that would be the case.
It would be like us having a race, both of us with the same make and model of car, and I hire a professional driver, and have the car tuned up by a professional pit crew, and you take yours to jiffy lube and have your grandmother drive. Would you be surprised that my car outperformed yours?
---------
Yes, NT is not built on the 95/98/ME code base. But look at it's track record.
When ease of use and speed are issues, they will move code into kerenl space that does not belong there.
There are things they can not take out, or it breaks compatibility with the NT code base as well as the 95 code base.
Can you secure a XP box? Sure if you really know what your doing. You have to download or purchase a lot of stuff and stay on top of security. Most users can't, even if they rely on Microsoft Update, their system is still not secure.
--------------
Microsoft were security geniuses, they designed the ActiveX control.
They allowed the developer to sign there own control, which was not really smart.
But they had the feature of you being confirming you want a new control downloaded and installed. However, you could check the "Yes" always box for a particular provider.
Microsoft swore up and down, that this would not be crackable. So much so, they recommended that you could and SHOULD check the "Yes" always trust Microsoft box. It was only there in the first place to prevent a public outcry from us Anal Rentive privacy freaks.
Well about a year ago, there was a Microsoft ActiveX control with a secruity flaw found in it. Since it is Microsofts Control, I can set my website to send your browser the broken version and take advantage of the security hole. If you selected the "Yes" checkmark, it will download without you knowing it and I can expoloit your system.
Microsoft did not design a way to revoke signatures. So it is not possible to prevent an older ActiveX control from downloading over a newer one. Or an insecure one from downloading over a patched one.
Microsoft's solution. There are too many webistes that rely on MS signed ActiveX controls. So the solution is to make sure that you never check the "Yes always" box for MicoroSoft, others may still be OK (like Adobe), and decide each time if the control is something that should be downloaded.
So yes I will bash, and no, I don't trust them when they say that they have secured something.
---------
Rule of Thumb: If an excel spreadsheet has computations that are so complex, you need a mainframe or cluster to run them in a timely maner. Then your data is in some serious danger.
------------
Image being able to play every board layout at one time
----------------
The next time I download something from the internet on Windows 2000/2003 or XP, should I check the "yes" box for "Always trust content from Micorsoft?
That is all that needs to be said on Microsoft security and why I feel free to post about windows crashing, secuirty and annoyances.
-------------
Do I sound bitter? I guess it is because I think I should own my computer. Paying to license software, for the most part is a game, especially if there is built in obsolence. I also expect there should be a way to open up a document I created 10 years ago.
I do not mind the thought of living in a world where Micosoft does not hold a monopoly, and will play nice because it is in its best interest.
I fear to live in a world where Microsoft has there way, renting software on a monthly basis, Micorsoft determins what software I can run, what files I can open and what content that is mine I can have access to.
We should all hope we someday live in a world where Microsoft is a player, not a monopoly
start linux troll mode -------------
A consistent and open standards for sharing data and information interchange is GOOD.
A consistant user interface is GOOD.
Having ~93% of the desktop systems on the planet having the same security holes, having many of them, and having more discoverd every day, some of which can not really be plugged is BAD.
Having closed standards and basterdized standards is BAD
----------------end linux troll mode
Ok, lets start with bad points
What are the advantages
I would wonder what besides a new CS building built by the Gates Foundation could induce a computer lab to use HPC for clustering or mainframes.
Wake me up when Seymour Cray buys a site license
I think is more of a hoby and about fun than it is about Money. Somehow, I don't see Michael "setteling out of court" if the case is going their way.