You produce CDs as loss leaders for your tour, not the other way around as it used to be.
As I've said repeatedly here and elsewhere, nobody in history has ever PAID FOR MUSIC. They've paid for ACCESS to music - whether it was drinks at a pub or bar, or tickets to a concert. Nobody paid for the music itself. The Grateful Dead realized this with their motto, "The music's free - the concert costs."
Only when phonographs came in was it possible to charge for music. And as soon as reel-to-reel tape recorders could be hooked to phonograph players, and later when cassette recorders with radios built in came into being, that period was over.
When the PC and ripping of CDs became possible, that whole concept of "music as product" was doomed.
The future is live broadcast over the Net by subscription and touring.
Don't tell me it can't be done. It's the only way musicians are going to make money in the future, so it will be done.
Besides, as the Situationists said forty years ago, "Art has been superceded. The only art worth making today is your own life."
"My objection with this Wired article is mostly that David Byrne is whining about the changes in a music industry that has made it harder for major labels to control everything. Just because he got to the top by playing the game, and the game has changed, he has decided that it's now harder for people to succeed."
I disagree. Byrne did not seem to be whining about anything in the article. And what he means by "harder to succeed" is simply that there is no longer one simple way: sign your life away to a label - which as he says was never a guarantee anyway. Now there is choice, and he is clearly celebrating that choice in business models.
One that I think he overlooked was direct broadcast over the Net. Rather than just touring about, a band today could have a small studio equipped for video broadcast over the Net. With live or "pre-recorded live" performances sold by subscription, a band wouldn't have to physically tour as much to make the same sort of money and have the same degree of contact with their fans that touring provides. Physically touring on occasion - or just having various live performance venues on occasion - would still be necessary, of course, but the subscription live broadcast model would a very valuable additional income stream that also provides more continuous contact with the fan base. It definitely would work for the bands who are as much "visual" as audio, such as the Corrs.
Uhm, as far as I can tell from the article, Byrne is impressed by how things are going that make it easier for emerging artists to have CHOICE in how they make their deals.
The article wasn't about bitching and moaning that he isn't a "star" any more. It was exactly about what you said: that making a living as a musician is now more accessible.
Virtual reality went nowhere. It was going to be the next big thing (albeit probably years down the road.) Instead, aside from the military, some medical apps maybe, and research institutions, nobody uses it. So Jaron got put on the back burner. That pissed him off, so now he attacks everyone else who has an idea.
I didn't bother to read the whole review when I see THIS nonsense:
"Ethernet "Internet Connection Required." Modem is nonfunctional (for now). 1,280-by-800 resolution forced by internal graphics. Adobe Flash installation can be confusing for a novice. Google search window goes to WebRunner, not the expected Firefox. Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run."
Obviously if you're buying a box that requires Google software, you need a NIC and an Internet connection. Nobody ever said this was a standalone box. And almost nobody buys a standalone box these days anyway. A non-issue.
Since 60% of more of people in the US have broadband, the modem is irrelevant. Sure, it would be better if it functioned out of the box for the small number of people who don't have broadband - and such people are probably the only ones who'd buy a $200 box for price reasons - but obviously the designers went for some el-cheapo WinModem crap to lower the cost without considering the lack of support. Not a big deal considering the price.
Flash installation is confusing for any Linux distro for a novice. No news here. Not really a deal killer given the price, again.
The Google Search design appears to be stupid, big deal. Again, hardly a deal killer given the price.
But the killer phrase: "Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run."
DUH! No shit, Dick Tracy! It's fucking LINUX, you MORONS!
This is obviously written by the Windows PC reviewer, not some unbiased reviewer.
Kaspersky has made TWO major mistakes in a week's time.
First, back on the 14th, they screwed up and issued update that had SERIOUS consequences for quite a few people running large networks. One guy had 700 machines down. Turns out they had a bug in the code since 1996, which was only discovered when they switched Microsoft compilers for version 7. The Linux compilers caught the bug and so the Linux version of KAV didn't have a problem. But the Microsoft compilers compiled the bug with no warnings or error messages, so it slipped through. At least that was the explanation Eugene Kaspersky put out on the forum.
Second, this latest bug with Explorer which was fortunately caught within a couple hours. My client's machines never even saw it because their update cycle was longer.
I've just started installing KAV 6.0 on one of my client's machines. He was suspicious of using a Russian company in the first place, but I told him it was okay since they're a high detector, got a management kit, good price for his 24 machine, etc.
Then this shit happened. Doesn't make me look good, either. Fortunately it didn't drop our machines, it just caused a message to pop up saying the application launch didn't work.
And recovering has not been easy, since the Admin Kit apparently still has the crap in it's source directory used for installing KAV on client machines. I'm going to have to uninstall and reinstall the Kit to make sure the buggy components are not there as I finish installing the rest of the machines.
But what someone else above said is likely true - sooner or later some AV is going to drop thousands of scores of thousands of machines. This is obviously true when you consider that AVs are programs that burrow deep into the OS AND have almost continual updates of both signatures and software components. It's like running Windows Update every hour of every day! Sooner or later there's going to be a catastrophe. It's just not a sustainable process.
People should know that computer techs frequently do "rifle" through your hard drive - and sometimes even copy your stuff onto their systems - and not as authorized backups, either.
I saw one of these TV news consumer expose type pieces on computer repair services when a tech was filmed secretly doing exactly that. After being exposed, he was allegedly fired by the company providing the services, but then was allegedly hired back.
Bringing a computer into a shop with criminal activity on it is just plain moronic.
That said, I wonder if it was really "child porn." You can go to some porn sites and download pics of girls that LOOK underage, but are actually 18 or older - in fact, many times, WELL over 18 (like 30!) if you look closer. Wearing pigtails doesn't tell a person's age (actually I can't stand pigtails as a hair style, anyway!.) Most sites have to comply with the Federal law that mandates maintaining the ages and addresses of all models on their site - or at least formally declaring that all models are over 18 - how this is done for sites that just buy DVDs of these images, I don't know. Unless the cops establish the ages of the females in question, or the state law says that ANY depiction of underage sex (and some even try to make cartoon drawings illegal) is illegal, they may have a problem proving their case. Of course, if the images clearly show immature females, that won't be much of a problem - it's hard to fake a naked ten-year-old.
Anybody working at the Guantanamo prison deserves death threats.
Fuck 'em.
They deserve to be arrested, charged with war crimes, and sentenced to significant time in a military prison.
The US is torturing prisoners who have not been formally and legally charged with any crime. That is a war crime. The responsibility goes right up to the Commander in Chief George W. Bush and he needs to be arrested and sent to The Hague for trial as a war criminal along with the complete chain of command down to the prison guards executing the orders.
Do a clean install of Windows XP on one machine, Windows Vista on another, and any major Linux distro on a third.
Do not connect them to the Internet or any network. Just turn them on and let them run.
Let them run, running no apps or anything but background processes, for as long as it takes - months, years, whatever - and see which one crashes first solely because of its design.
I can just about guarantee you that Vista will crash first, XP second, and Linux third (if at all.)
I have an old system I use as a backup for my main system. It run Windows 98 on one side and Slackware 10 on the other. If I let it run Windows 98 with nothing but a wallpaper changer running, it will eventually run out of system resources and crash (a known problem with Windows 98). I'm betting Vista and XP have similar if different limitations and Linux doesn't (as long as there's a cron job running to clean out/temp which is true for just about every distro.)
I just had some moron respond to an earlier critical post of mine about the Windows Registry claiming that he has used Windows for "ten years" and "never had a problem with the Registry" - which is basically claiming he's never had a problem with Windows since virtually all problems in Windows start with the Registry. I discount buggy drivers because buggy drivers can be a problem in any OS - except that in Windows they can screw up the Registry as well, resulting in a total system loss.
This kind of stupid troll remark show the depths to which Windows shills will go to support this POS.
These morons will blame everything that goes wrong on Windows on third party developers who "don't play by the rules". Well, either Linux developers DO "play by the rules" en mass - which is doubtful - or Linux has better rules - or a better basic separation between OS and apps - because I NEVER see the bullshit events on Linux that I do on Windows.
When's the last time you heard about "corrupt drivers" on the Linux forums? Reinstall a "corrupt driver" on Linux? What's that? A BUGGY driver, sure - all the time. But "corrupt drivers"? What IS a "corrupt driver" in Windows? I'll tell you - it's a BUGGY driver that screws up the REGISTRY. Linux doesn't have that problem.
Same thing with apps. A Linux app crashes, it almost never takes down the OS. Occasionally it will take down the X server. I haven't had that happen at all since installing openSUSE last year. Windows? Please. Run any Adobe video media product on XP. Sooner or later, your system is going down - probably sooner. The Adobe apps themselves crash regularly, since they're as badly written as Windows.
I just spent eight hours at a client fixing a totally hosed Windows XP which couldn't install anything, couldn't uninstall anything, couldn't detect a new external DVD burner, and assorted other issues. A System Restore failed to fix the problems (which means either in this case the Registry wasn't even involved or the problems occurred before the Restore point I used), a Repair Install hosed itself and only a clean install solved the problems.
All these guys do with that machine is run Adobe Premiere and Encore and PhotoShop and ACDSee to take still photos and put them on digital media. They have problems nearly every week with one or more of the machines.
"up until SP3 or 4, which basically crippled the stability of the OS to XP-level"
Interesting point.
I suspect that since XP is still selling well, we're going to see a LOT of "updates" - including "Service Pack 3 - that basically crash the OS - so people will buy Vista.
XP is up to 89 "critical" security updates at this point. And is it a coincidence that the latest Service Pack for.NET Framework 3.0 - which basically just backports stuff they're using in Vista - is causing problems for people installing it. It wouldn't install at all on my XP.
This is the sort of "marketing" Microsoft will do.
Somebody apparently decided to develop an OS on his spare time and released the source code for anybody to improve on.
I've heard it's taking off like gangbusters.
Even has a GUI and all.
Some Finnish kid, though.
Sounds un-American to me, doing stuff for free. The American way is to pay through the nose for stuff that doesn't work. Gotta buy American or the Chinese will own everything. including the oil. Or maybe the Finnish. (Never gonna use any cell phone except Motorola.)
You know with hottie Summer playing a Terminator in "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" that's there going to be some episodes down the road with John Connor gets hot for the Terminator or vice versa.
Talk about a love doll!
'Course it would be more fun if Sarah got hot for the Terminator!
You're an unbelievable idiot if you think the Registry is designed to prevent bad setups.
The Register is hoses REGULARLY by Microsoft and third party apps.
Linux NEVER has a problem with "corrupted drivers" - because there is no such thing. Drivers do not update themselves in Windows. They update Registry settings - and they regularly become corrupted requiring reinstall.
I just spent eight hours yesterday reinstalling Windows because some app screwed up the USB subsystem in XP. A perfectly good USB DVD drive wasn't recognized. Then the Windows installer became hoses, being unable to install anything without "requiring admin privileges" even when I WAS operating as Administrator. A Restore didn't help - a Repair Install didn't help. Only a clean install straightened that mess out.
This happens constantly with my clients.
Linux NEVER has these problems because Linux relies (with the exception of certain binary formatted files and the package database) on text configuration files. Once set properly, they are never updated except manually (or via the GUI front end tools which is the same thing). This is WHY Linux is FAR more reliable in operation than Windows will ever be. Apps of questionable reliability are not allowed to regularly write to a central database controlling the whole fucking OS!
"And having all your settings in one file means that all of your settings get corrupted if the one file goes."
No shit, Sherlock. So your little "lesson" in all the good the Registry does becomes moot since that is what happens frequently. And just because it might be a third party app that does that means Microsoft is off the hook to you.
What part of "biographical incident" in the definition of anecdote didn't you get?
"Anecdotal data" is a common usage. It means bullshit based on one person's experience. Which is exactly what poster was referring to in his defense of Vista.
"In Windows, the node I was working on was 4 levels removed from the root. The periodicity of integration decayed exponentially and unpredictably as you approached the root so it ended up that it took between 1 and 3 months for my code to get to the root node, and some multiple of that for it to reach the other nodes."
Brilliant development model. Now we know why it took five, six years to get Vista out the door in the crappy state it's in.
I have confidence their alpha - for the last release - is as good as their final product of the current release will be.
In other words, run the alpha of XP - it'll be as good as Vista.
People are joking. Microsoft doesn't release finals - they release alphas, then rely on updates and service packs and guinea pigs paying them for the privilege to fix their crap.
Their excuse is that since they tightened up security, the developers all need to recode their apps so they follow proper security guidelines that they violated years ago.
No. Bullshit. It takes the developers a YEAR to recode around some security issues? Read the comments from the developers under the article - it takes them ten times as long to code for Windows as it does for UNIX/Linux due to crappy design.
The reason there was no security on Windows is simply bad design from the get-go.
The Registry was the dumbest idea in OS history. UNIX/Linux doesn't have it - much more stable and secure. I got a client with a machine that won't install anything the other day precisely because of this crap. Windows hosed itself or one of their third party media apps hosed it. They can barely run 23 machines for two weeks without shit like this happening.
Microsoft didn't bitch for years about bad developer practices - such as QuickBooks, which was never even certified for Windows XP because of its bad practices - because they wanted the OS dominance on the desktop, instead of security for their customers.
And now they're not fixing the compatability issues because they want people to buy Vista NOW rather than wait for SP1 because their sales are flat.
Slashdot Mirror
And Byrne correctly sees it in the article.
Music as "product" is out.
Music as "performance" is back in.
You produce CDs as loss leaders for your tour, not the other way around as it used to be.
As I've said repeatedly here and elsewhere, nobody in history has ever PAID FOR MUSIC. They've paid for ACCESS to music - whether it was drinks at a pub or bar, or tickets to a concert. Nobody paid for the music itself. The Grateful Dead realized this with their motto, "The music's free - the concert costs."
Only when phonographs came in was it possible to charge for music. And as soon as reel-to-reel tape recorders could be hooked to phonograph players, and later when cassette recorders with radios built in came into being, that period was over.
When the PC and ripping of CDs became possible, that whole concept of "music as product" was doomed.
The future is live broadcast over the Net by subscription and touring.
Don't tell me it can't be done. It's the only way musicians are going to make money in the future, so it will be done.
Besides, as the Situationists said forty years ago, "Art has been superceded. The only art worth making today is your own life."
"My objection with this Wired article is mostly that David Byrne is whining about the changes in a music industry that has made it harder for major labels to control everything. Just because he got to the top by playing the game, and the game has changed, he has decided that it's now harder for people to succeed."
I disagree. Byrne did not seem to be whining about anything in the article. And what he means by "harder to succeed" is simply that there is no longer one simple way: sign your life away to a label - which as he says was never a guarantee anyway. Now there is choice, and he is clearly celebrating that choice in business models.
One that I think he overlooked was direct broadcast over the Net. Rather than just touring about, a band today could have a small studio equipped for video broadcast over the Net. With live or "pre-recorded live" performances sold by subscription, a band wouldn't have to physically tour as much to make the same sort of money and have the same degree of contact with their fans that touring provides. Physically touring on occasion - or just having various live performance venues on occasion - would still be necessary, of course, but the subscription live broadcast model would a very valuable additional income stream that also provides more continuous contact with the fan base. It definitely would work for the bands who are as much "visual" as audio, such as the Corrs.
Uhm, as far as I can tell from the article, Byrne is impressed by how things are going that make it easier for emerging artists to have CHOICE in how they make their deals.
The article wasn't about bitching and moaning that he isn't a "star" any more. It was exactly about what you said: that making a living as a musician is now more accessible.
I'll add to that the reason.
Virtual reality went nowhere. It was going to be the next big thing (albeit probably years down the road.) Instead, aside from the military, some medical apps maybe, and research institutions, nobody uses it. So Jaron got put on the back burner. That pissed him off, so now he attacks everyone else who has an idea.
Typical human reaction.
Ignore him.
Jaron Lanier hasn't said anything interesting since his attack on future technology some years ago.
The man, despite being a major proponent of virtual reality, simply has zero imagination.
He also has a huge ego to imagine that anyone cares any more what he says.
What have you done for us lately, Jaron? Besides bitch and moan, that is.
I didn't bother to read the whole review when I see THIS nonsense:
"Ethernet "Internet Connection Required." Modem is nonfunctional (for now). 1,280-by-800 resolution forced by internal graphics. Adobe Flash installation can be confusing for a novice. Google search window goes to WebRunner, not the expected Firefox. Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run."
Obviously if you're buying a box that requires Google software, you need a NIC and an Internet connection. Nobody ever said this was a standalone box. And almost nobody buys a standalone box these days anyway. A non-issue.
Since 60% of more of people in the US have broadband, the modem is irrelevant. Sure, it would be better if it functioned out of the box for the small number of people who don't have broadband - and such people are probably the only ones who'd buy a $200 box for price reasons - but obviously the designers went for some el-cheapo WinModem crap to lower the cost without considering the lack of support. Not a big deal considering the price.
Flash installation is confusing for any Linux distro for a novice. No news here. Not really a deal killer given the price, again.
The Google Search design appears to be stupid, big deal. Again, hardly a deal killer given the price.
But the killer phrase: "Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run."
DUH! No shit, Dick Tracy! It's fucking LINUX, you MORONS!
This is obviously written by the Windows PC reviewer, not some unbiased reviewer.
Kaspersky has made TWO major mistakes in a week's time.
First, back on the 14th, they screwed up and issued update that had SERIOUS consequences for quite a few people running large networks. One guy had 700 machines down. Turns out they had a bug in the code since 1996, which was only discovered when they switched Microsoft compilers for version 7. The Linux compilers caught the bug and so the Linux version of KAV didn't have a problem. But the Microsoft compilers compiled the bug with no warnings or error messages, so it slipped through. At least that was the explanation Eugene Kaspersky put out on the forum.
Second, this latest bug with Explorer which was fortunately caught within a couple hours. My client's machines never even saw it because their update cycle was longer.
I've just started installing KAV 6.0 on one of my client's machines. He was suspicious of using a Russian company in the first place, but I told him it was okay since they're a high detector, got a management kit, good price for his 24 machine, etc.
Then this shit happened. Doesn't make me look good, either. Fortunately it didn't drop our machines, it just caused a message to pop up saying the application launch didn't work.
And recovering has not been easy, since the Admin Kit apparently still has the crap in it's source directory used for installing KAV on client machines. I'm going to have to uninstall and reinstall the Kit to make sure the buggy components are not there as I finish installing the rest of the machines.
But what someone else above said is likely true - sooner or later some AV is going to drop thousands of scores of thousands of machines. This is obviously true when you consider that AVs are programs that burrow deep into the OS AND have almost continual updates of both signatures and software components. It's like running Windows Update every hour of every day! Sooner or later there's going to be a catastrophe. It's just not a sustainable process.
Can you fuck comfortably in the back seat?
That was the criteria in "Triple X: State of the Union" with their Shelby.
Of course. Where did I say different?
It goes to the issue of whether the guy was a moron for putting actual criminal content, rather than just porn content.
I knew you could.
People should know that computer techs frequently do "rifle" through your hard drive - and sometimes even copy your stuff onto their systems - and not as authorized backups, either.
I saw one of these TV news consumer expose type pieces on computer repair services when a tech was filmed secretly doing exactly that. After being exposed, he was allegedly fired by the company providing the services, but then was allegedly hired back.
Bringing a computer into a shop with criminal activity on it is just plain moronic.
That said, I wonder if it was really "child porn." You can go to some porn sites and download pics of girls that LOOK underage, but are actually 18 or older - in fact, many times, WELL over 18 (like 30!) if you look closer. Wearing pigtails doesn't tell a person's age (actually I can't stand pigtails as a hair style, anyway!.) Most sites have to comply with the Federal law that mandates maintaining the ages and addresses of all models on their site - or at least formally declaring that all models are over 18 - how this is done for sites that just buy DVDs of these images, I don't know. Unless the cops establish the ages of the females in question, or the state law says that ANY depiction of underage sex (and some even try to make cartoon drawings illegal) is illegal, they may have a problem proving their case. Of course, if the images clearly show immature females, that won't be much of a problem - it's hard to fake a naked ten-year-old.
Tell me another - that the troops there don't know what is going on.
They read the papers, too.
Anybody working at the Guantanamo prison deserves death threats.
Fuck 'em.
They deserve to be arrested, charged with war crimes, and sentenced to significant time in a military prison.
The US is torturing prisoners who have not been formally and legally charged with any crime. That is a war crime. The responsibility goes right up to the Commander in Chief George W. Bush and he needs to be arrested and sent to The Hague for trial as a war criminal along with the complete chain of command down to the prison guards executing the orders.
Do a clean install of Windows XP on one machine, Windows Vista on another, and any major Linux distro on a third.
/temp which is true for just about every distro.)
Do not connect them to the Internet or any network. Just turn them on and let them run.
Let them run, running no apps or anything but background processes, for as long as it takes - months, years, whatever - and see which one crashes first solely because of its design.
I can just about guarantee you that Vista will crash first, XP second, and Linux third (if at all.)
I have an old system I use as a backup for my main system. It run Windows 98 on one side and Slackware 10 on the other. If I let it run Windows 98 with nothing but a wallpaper changer running, it will eventually run out of system resources and crash (a known problem with Windows 98). I'm betting Vista and XP have similar if different limitations and Linux doesn't (as long as there's a cron job running to clean out
I just had some moron respond to an earlier critical post of mine about the Windows Registry claiming that he has used Windows for "ten years" and "never had a problem with the Registry" - which is basically claiming he's never had a problem with Windows since virtually all problems in Windows start with the Registry. I discount buggy drivers because buggy drivers can be a problem in any OS - except that in Windows they can screw up the Registry as well, resulting in a total system loss.
This kind of stupid troll remark show the depths to which Windows shills will go to support this POS.
These morons will blame everything that goes wrong on Windows on third party developers who "don't play by the rules". Well, either Linux developers DO "play by the rules" en mass - which is doubtful - or Linux has better rules - or a better basic separation between OS and apps - because I NEVER see the bullshit events on Linux that I do on Windows.
When's the last time you heard about "corrupt drivers" on the Linux forums? Reinstall a "corrupt driver" on Linux? What's that? A BUGGY driver, sure - all the time. But "corrupt drivers"? What IS a "corrupt driver" in Windows? I'll tell you - it's a BUGGY driver that screws up the REGISTRY. Linux doesn't have that problem.
Same thing with apps. A Linux app crashes, it almost never takes down the OS. Occasionally it will take down the X server. I haven't had that happen at all since installing openSUSE last year. Windows? Please. Run any Adobe video media product on XP. Sooner or later, your system is going down - probably sooner. The Adobe apps themselves crash regularly, since they're as badly written as Windows.
I just spent eight hours at a client fixing a totally hosed Windows XP which couldn't install anything, couldn't uninstall anything, couldn't detect a new external DVD burner, and assorted other issues. A System Restore failed to fix the problems (which means either in this case the Registry wasn't even involved or the problems occurred before the Restore point I used), a Repair Install hosed itself and only a clean install solved the problems.
All these guys do with that machine is run Adobe Premiere and Encore and PhotoShop and ACDSee to take still photos and put them on digital media. They have problems nearly every week with one or more of the machines.
Windows is SHIT.
Tell me different, YOU'RE SHIT.
"up until SP3 or 4, which basically crippled the stability of the OS to XP-level"
.NET Framework 3.0 - which basically just backports stuff they're using in Vista - is causing problems for people installing it. It wouldn't install at all on my XP.
Interesting point.
I suspect that since XP is still selling well, we're going to see a LOT of "updates" - including "Service Pack 3 - that basically crash the OS - so people will buy Vista.
XP is up to 89 "critical" security updates at this point. And is it a coincidence that the latest Service Pack for
This is the sort of "marketing" Microsoft will do.
Somebody apparently decided to develop an OS on his spare time and released the source code for anybody to improve on.
I've heard it's taking off like gangbusters.
Even has a GUI and all.
Some Finnish kid, though.
Sounds un-American to me, doing stuff for free. The American way is to pay through the nose for stuff that doesn't work. Gotta buy American or the Chinese will own everything. including the oil. Or maybe the Finnish. (Never gonna use any cell phone except Motorola.)
10 years and you're never had a problem with Windows.
You're a fucking idiot if you think anybody on the planet believes that shit any more.
Troll.
You know with hottie Summer playing a Terminator in "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" that's there going to be some episodes down the road with John Connor gets hot for the Terminator or vice versa.
Talk about a love doll!
'Course it would be more fun if Sarah got hot for the Terminator!
You're an unbelievable idiot if you think the Registry is designed to prevent bad setups.
The Register is hoses REGULARLY by Microsoft and third party apps.
Linux NEVER has a problem with "corrupted drivers" - because there is no such thing. Drivers do not update themselves in Windows. They update Registry settings - and they regularly become corrupted requiring reinstall.
I just spent eight hours yesterday reinstalling Windows because some app screwed up the USB subsystem in XP. A perfectly good USB DVD drive wasn't recognized. Then the Windows installer became hoses, being unable to install anything without "requiring admin privileges" even when I WAS operating as Administrator. A Restore didn't help - a Repair Install didn't help. Only a clean install straightened that mess out.
This happens constantly with my clients.
Linux NEVER has these problems because Linux relies (with the exception of certain binary formatted files and the package database) on text configuration files. Once set properly, they are never updated except manually (or via the GUI front end tools which is the same thing). This is WHY Linux is FAR more reliable in operation than Windows will ever be. Apps of questionable reliability are not allowed to regularly write to a central database controlling the whole fucking OS!
"And having all your settings in one file means that all of your settings get corrupted if the one file goes."
No shit, Sherlock. So your little "lesson" in all the good the Registry does becomes moot since that is what happens frequently. And just because it might be a third party app that does that means Microsoft is off the hook to you.
Get a fucking clue.
Read a book on introductory science. Or try one on statistical sampling.
"in urban environments".
"with little to no collateral damage"
Right. I'll buy that for a dollar.
What part of "biographical incident" in the definition of anecdote didn't you get?
"Anecdotal data" is a common usage. It means bullshit based on one person's experience. Which is exactly what poster was referring to in his defense of Vista.
Try again, grammar Nazi.
From the referenced blog:
"In Windows, the node I was working on was 4 levels removed from the root. The periodicity of integration decayed exponentially and unpredictably as you approached the root so it ended up that it took between 1 and 3 months for my code to get to the root node, and some multiple of that for it to reach the other nodes."
Brilliant development model. Now we know why it took five, six years to get Vista out the door in the crappy state it's in.
They should talk to Linus.
I have confidence their alpha - for the last release - is as good as their final product of the current release will be.
In other words, run the alpha of XP - it'll be as good as Vista.
People are joking. Microsoft doesn't release finals - they release alphas, then rely on updates and service packs and guinea pigs paying them for the privilege to fix their crap.
Their excuse is that since they tightened up security, the developers all need to recode their apps so they follow proper security guidelines that they violated years ago.
No. Bullshit. It takes the developers a YEAR to recode around some security issues? Read the comments from the developers under the article - it takes them ten times as long to code for Windows as it does for UNIX/Linux due to crappy design.
The reason there was no security on Windows is simply bad design from the get-go.
The Registry was the dumbest idea in OS history. UNIX/Linux doesn't have it - much more stable and secure. I got a client with a machine that won't install anything the other day precisely because of this crap. Windows hosed itself or one of their third party media apps hosed it. They can barely run 23 machines for two weeks without shit like this happening.
Microsoft didn't bitch for years about bad developer practices - such as QuickBooks, which was never even certified for Windows XP because of its bad practices - because they wanted the OS dominance on the desktop, instead of security for their customers.
And now they're not fixing the compatability issues because they want people to buy Vista NOW rather than wait for SP1 because their sales are flat.
People who use Windows are suckers.
"the use of their yet unreleased Windows Server 2008 in a production environment."
Now how stupid is that? What sys admin would use an unreleased OS in a production environment?
That's like Rule No. 1, isn't it?