Who stores their credit-card information on passport? MSN Wallet only allows access to one store now - MSN. And the last time I heard of a security problem relating to MSN's wallet service was a few years ago (and that was basically just a cookie-stealing problem).
MSN no longer pushes it and you'd be stupid to buy into it. I know of a more insecure service that I use to pay my bills.
Why do consumers need to embrace a service they do not know of (or care about) the internal workings of? Especially when they have no alternative.
Most consumers don't care about how they login to a service, it's just a form for them to fill in. If the form changes because that site switched to using another form of authentication, they have no choice but to switch with it.
They shot themselves in the foot a long time ago with extremely high licensing costs and requirements as well as complicated implementation requirements (not to mention the tiny client portfolio or constant security problems).
Besides, there's no push for businesses to either adopt single-sign-on services, or for customers to want it. Businesses require flexibility when it comes to user authorisation and profiles that 3rd-party services cannot offer. Most people either use the same user-name and password combination for all of their services, and there aren't many browsers that won't auto-complete u/p forms.
At least with this announcement, Microsoft might be able to push some of it's resources from trying to push this serviced to 3rd parties to fixing the services internally (ever tried to log-out?)
Windows even goes so far as to call it's program Shared Source
Who's Windows? Besides, there are tons of different names for "open source" licenses.
I imagine there are even provisions in there that forbid you from working on competing open source projects such as Linux.
There isn't.
Windows is only Open Source once you pony up some dough, or have significant buying power in order to make Microsoft feel it's worth it. Joe Schmoe developer isn't going to be seeing Windows' source any time soon
Microsoft MVPs (who are just your regular Joe Schmoe) have the option to access Windows' source code.
This is the reason for gmail pissing me off so much. It seems that all of this complexity just prevents use of normal browsing, and it regularly breaks down on me (are they ever going to fix that 'Loading...' bug?)
For example, embedded URLs in emails don't just link to the website, or utilise the 'target' attribute - they use javascript which prevents me from opening them in new tabs (I have to drag them onto the tab bar). Same thing goes for email conversations - but I can't drag those, so there's no tab support at all.
Yes, this is a nice little feat of JavaScript engineering (or whatever process they used to do it), but in practise, it makes gmail slow and hard to use. I don't see anything they couldn't have done with regular HTML, CSS and minimal JavaScript that would function like people have come to expect a regular web-page to function like.
They might also save a few more bucks by not writing so much javascript and not using so many iframes (think of the requests!). All of gmail's complexity leads it to regularly breaking on my machine and just make the experience more annoying for me (I use tabs for a reason!)
How bad is their suspension system that they have to devise a fix for it that takes them the whole weekend (granted, they probably won't be working on it over the weekend)?
Don't they use transactions, or logs, or even an undo feature?
Slashdot Mirror
Who stores their credit-card information on passport? MSN Wallet only allows access to one store now - MSN. And the last time I heard of a security problem relating to MSN's wallet service was a few years ago (and that was basically just a cookie-stealing problem).
MSN no longer pushes it and you'd be stupid to buy into it. I know of a more insecure service that I use to pay my bills.
Why do consumers need to embrace a service they do not know of (or care about) the internal workings of? Especially when they have no alternative.
Most consumers don't care about how they login to a service, it's just a form for them to fill in. If the form changes because that site switched to using another form of authentication, they have no choice but to switch with it.
They shot themselves in the foot a long time ago with extremely high licensing costs and requirements as well as complicated implementation requirements (not to mention the tiny client portfolio or constant security problems).
Besides, there's no push for businesses to either adopt single-sign-on services, or for customers to want it.
Businesses require flexibility when it comes to user authorisation and profiles that 3rd-party services cannot offer.
Most people either use the same user-name and password combination for all of their services, and there aren't many browsers that won't auto-complete u/p forms.
At least with this announcement, Microsoft might be able to push some of it's resources from trying to push this serviced to 3rd parties to fixing the services internally (ever tried to log-out?)
Romeo & Juliet, Act 2, Scene 4 -
Nurse
Is your man secret? Did you ne'er hear say,
Two may keep counsel, putting one away?
Then you find devices that just remove/kill the existing RFID and embed a new one. No sign of physical tampering.
The hard part is finding a checker who won't notice. I can't figure out that one.
It's the guy that looks like he hates his job and can't wait to get home to his miserably boring life.
And this is Wal-Mart.
Windows even goes so far as to call it's program Shared Source
Who's Windows?
Besides, there are tons of different names for "open source" licenses.
I imagine there are even provisions in there that forbid you from working on competing open source projects such as Linux.
There isn't.
Windows is only Open Source once you pony up some dough, or have significant buying power in order to make Microsoft feel it's worth it. Joe Schmoe developer isn't going to be seeing Windows' source any time soon
Microsoft MVPs (who are just your regular Joe Schmoe) have the option to access Windows' source code.
30,000 passengers? Getting dangerously close to an integer overflow there.
Except info has waaaaay better navigation support.
Does anyone know what grants ICANN the right to essentially have a monopoly on the domain names?
It seemed like a good idea at the time.
"Is there any reason another group can't offer the service of redirecting a person to an IP address based on a set of words?"
I've got a machine under the stairs doing just that... Why don't I run the root servers out of my house?! I won't even charge you $4 million in taxes!
Quickly recouped when they kick you out and sell to someone else.
ICANN: Repossessing the internet.
The Aqueduct.
Yeah, I've got Apple Mail, why should I take anything less? ;)
For me, it only happens when I try and load gmail for the first time (ie. http://gmail.com/), not on conversations or anything inside gmail.
(I also don't have an Adblocker installed)
Sorry, is locate too high-class for you?
Nope, Safari.
This is the reason for gmail pissing me off so much. It seems that all of this complexity just prevents use of normal browsing, and it regularly breaks down on me (are they ever going to fix that 'Loading...' bug?)
For example, embedded URLs in emails don't just link to the website, or utilise the 'target' attribute - they use javascript which prevents me from opening them in new tabs (I have to drag them onto the tab bar). Same thing goes for email conversations - but I can't drag those, so there's no tab support at all.
Yes, this is a nice little feat of JavaScript engineering (or whatever process they used to do it), but in practise, it makes gmail slow and hard to use. I don't see anything they couldn't have done with regular HTML, CSS and minimal JavaScript that would function like people have come to expect a regular web-page to function like.
They might also save a few more bucks by not writing so much javascript and not using so many iframes (think of the requests!). All of gmail's complexity leads it to regularly breaking on my machine and just make the experience more annoying for me (I use tabs for a reason!)
How bad is their suspension system that they have to devise a fix for it that takes them the whole weekend (granted, they probably won't be working on it over the weekend)?
Don't they use transactions, or logs, or even an undo feature?
There is a DECIDED lack of Country-Techno music on iTunes.
There is also a decided lack of that music in this country too (not that I'm complaining one bit).
The problem is that it turns into a debate, a pointless debate.
Continuing to fuel the fanatical debate that "my software is more free than yours."
I guess whatever infection the GPL spread onto Linux users to turn them into GPL-evangelists has mutated, and is now infecting other licences.
Novell and Mandrake can somehow make it with GPL
I'm not sure of the financial success of MandrakeSoft, but they don't seem to be creating a towering enterprise on GPL software.
And Novell is still relying on Netware and it's range of server products to rake in the cash.
You weren't even allowed to tell people about the source as I can remember.
Basically, you could look at it and get that feeling of disappointment that you signed your rights away just to look.