Vista just doesn't get any breaks on this site... ever
You're joking, I hope?
Every discussion of Vista is FULL of astroturfers defending the OS, and they're always modded up. It's almost impossible to discuss its real flaws because of all the Microsoft-sponsored noise.
And when I thought about it, if I had a 40 billion dollar company at stake, why yes I would have motive and could easily afford to keep a hundred people posting for mod points to manipulate a site like Slashdot.
The good thing about this attack is that it's obvious to anyone with a bit of sense that Microsoft is gaming Slashdot and other tech sites now.
It also shows how much they must fear Open Office. The team there and at Thunderbird should be pretty heartened by this, it shows they're on the right track.
OOo creates documents, spreadsheets, presentations and drawings.
It does so efficiently once you're familiar with it, often more efficiently than it's major competitors.
It saves your data in a format which can be opened by any other software that chooses to support it, and it costs nothing to install. If there's a document you're unable to create with it, chances are you don't know how to use it properly.
In spite of all this you're complaining, behaving like it whipped your dog. Why's that?
From the VistaBlog interview with Dave Marsh, Lead Program Manager responsible for Windows' handling of video;
Will Windows Vista content protection features increase CPU resource consumption?
Yes. However, the use of additional CPU cycles is inevitable, as the PC provides consumers with additional functionality. Windows Vista's content protection features were developed to carefully balance the need to provide robust protection from commercial content while still enabling great new experiences such as HD-DVD or Blu-Ray playback.
You can keep the second face. You seem to be getting plenty of use from it.
IP Innovation LLC is a subsidiary of Acacia, and Acacia recently appointed Brad Brunell, who worked for 16 years at Microsoft as general manager, intellectual property licensing. He's now a senior vice president. Other ex-Microsoft executives have also recently migrated to Acacia.
Microsoft can fix errors in their code, but they can do fuck all about what Firefox or Adobe Reader do with the input passed to them.
Which platforms does this vulnerability exist on?
Why aren't Firefox, mIRC, Adobe Acrobat, Outlook Express, Outlook 2000 and others vulnerable when they're installed on Linux? On Windows without IE7? On a Mac? Why didn't the vulnerability exist until IE7 was installed?
Your bosses have accepted it's their problem. Why don't you?
"M$" has modified the way it works, which does not mean it's "mistaken".
Yes it does.
This is from the Technet mea culpa blog posting by MSRC's Jonathan.
With Internet Explorer 7 installed, the flow is a bit different. IE7 began to do more validation up front to reject malformed URI's. When this malformed URI with a % was rejected by IE7, ShellExecute() tries to "fix up" the URI to be usable. During this process, the URI is not safely handled. IE7 rejects the URI, and on Windows Vista ShellExecute() gracefully rejects the URI. That's not the case on the older versions of Windows like Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 when IE7 is installed. Spin the facts as much as you like here, but anyone with a clue knows it is Microsoft's vulnerability. That's why they're the only ones who can fix it.
There's a whole shopping list of apps, including IE7 itself that were exposed to this vulnerability. Firefox was just the first to be accused.
Microsoft's only changed it's tune because Adobe's on the case with the Acrobat vulnerability. It's one thing to force a FOSS competitor to unnecessarily patch, but they'll have no luck with trying to force Adobe to fix every PDF reader out there.
I actually bought a couple, and they're a hoot to play with. Small enough to fit on the palm of my hand, and have enough battery for about 10 minutes of flight before recharging. Replacement copters cost AU25.00, so they're easily cheap enough to be disposable in the context of intel gathering.
The downside of the ones I have are that they're barely controllable in still air, and so light that any sort of wind would make them unusable.
Still, in the context of a protest, with half a dozen of them in the air and controlled by some sort of flocking algorithm, they'd be able to cover a lot of territory (faces) very quickly. Provided there's not much of a breeze, of course.
Anyone know what the weather was like at this event?
The bad thing about spam filtering in Hotmail is that they do it silently.
It's not just silent, it's unpredictable.
I've just sent two emails from my own server to my Hotmail account. The first was with one of those short.wmv videos as an attachment (3.5Mb), the second was the same email, but without the attachment.
The email with the video went through, while the second one, with identical text but no attachment, has vanished.
Slashdot Mirror
Just as a quick test, Redhat takes 48 seconds to load fully on my 3G M600i, and 11 seconds on my ADSL2 line at home.
How long does your iPhone take to load the same site?
You're joking, I hope?
Every discussion of Vista is FULL of astroturfers defending the OS, and they're always modded up. It's almost impossible to discuss its real flaws because of all the Microsoft-sponsored noise.
I'm having difficulty replicating your problem.
I'm using a fresh download of OOo 2.3 and unchanged defaults. Loading an image file works fine, as does exporting the document to .doc.
The good thing about this attack is that it's obvious to anyone with a bit of sense that Microsoft is gaming Slashdot and other tech sites now.
It also shows how much they must fear Open Office. The team there and at Thunderbird should be pretty heartened by this, it shows they're on the right track.
Interesting astroturf.
I haven't seen that one before. Is it going to be part of a campaign
Nah, they'll just use WGA to drop you into "reduced functionality mode".
Most Microsoft fanbois won't even notice.
Anyone who trusts Microsoft after the past two decades of dirty behavior is a fool.
According to Ballmer, EVERY copy of Linux is illegal.
Vendor lock-in is a positive?
I suppose if you enjoy Ballmer's firm grip on your testicles it is. Me, I don't swing that way.
This one's a bit elderly, but I found it handy for wrapping my head around Linux.
OOo creates documents, spreadsheets, presentations and drawings.
It does so efficiently once you're familiar with it, often more efficiently than it's major competitors.
It saves your data in a format which can be opened by any other software that chooses to support it, and it costs nothing to install. If there's a document you're unable to create with it, chances are you don't know how to use it properly.
In spite of all this you're complaining, behaving like it whipped your dog. Why's that?
From the VistaBlog interview with Dave Marsh, Lead Program Manager responsible for Windows' handling of video;
Will Windows Vista content protection features increase CPU resource consumption?Yes. However, the use of additional CPU cycles is inevitable, as the PC provides consumers with additional functionality. Windows Vista's content protection features were developed to carefully balance the need to provide robust protection from commercial content while still enabling great new experiences such as HD-DVD or Blu-Ray playback.
You can keep the second face. You seem to be getting plenty of use from it.It's not the eye-candy which eats processor cycles, RAM and network bandwidth. It's the DRM.
Vista was made for record companies and movie studios, not computer users.
Maybe.
IP Innovation LLC is a subsidiary of Acacia, and Acacia recently appointed Brad Brunell, who worked for 16 years at Microsoft as general manager, intellectual property licensing. He's now a senior vice president. Other ex-Microsoft executives have also recently migrated to Acacia.
Acacia are known as patent trolls.
Which platforms does this vulnerability exist on?
Why aren't Firefox, mIRC, Adobe Acrobat, Outlook Express, Outlook 2000 and others vulnerable when they're installed on Linux? On Windows without IE7? On a Mac? Why didn't the vulnerability exist until IE7 was installed?
Your bosses have accepted it's their problem. Why don't you?
None. ReactOS has replicated most of that functionality in a download of less than 25 megs.
Yes it does.
This is from the Technet mea culpa blog posting by MSRC's Jonathan.
With Internet Explorer 7 installed, the flow is a bit different. IE7 began to do more validation up front to reject malformed URI's. When this malformed URI with a % was rejected by IE7, ShellExecute() tries to "fix up" the URI to be usable. During this process, the URI is not safely handled. IE7 rejects the URI, and on Windows Vista ShellExecute() gracefully rejects the URI. That's not the case on the older versions of Windows like Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 when IE7 is installed. Spin the facts as much as you like here, but anyone with a clue knows it is Microsoft's vulnerability. That's why they're the only ones who can fix it.Rubbish.
There's a whole shopping list of apps, including IE7 itself that were exposed to this vulnerability. Firefox was just the first to be accused.
Microsoft's only changed it's tune because Adobe's on the case with the Acrobat vulnerability. It's one thing to force a FOSS competitor to unnecessarily patch, but they'll have no luck with trying to force Adobe to fix every PDF reader out there.
Why don't you just twist a red glow-stick into a ring and glue it to the front of a cereal box? It'll work as well as most 360s do...
We are.
Some of us just take Spam Assassin a little too literally.
They won't push their luck.
They've managed to turn a thread about how bad Vista is into one about how bad FOSS software is withough getting modded offtopic.
Now THAT'S clever marketing.
Hey, the kid should be grateful she didn't get Zuned.
Are you insane?
Do you know how many copies of Ubuntu that'd buy you?
Yeah, I was thinking of those too.
I actually bought a couple, and they're a hoot to play with. Small enough to fit on the palm of my hand, and have enough battery for about 10 minutes of flight before recharging. Replacement copters cost AU25.00, so they're easily cheap enough to be disposable in the context of intel gathering.
The downside of the ones I have are that they're barely controllable in still air, and so light that any sort of wind would make them unusable.
Still, in the context of a protest, with half a dozen of them in the air and controlled by some sort of flocking algorithm, they'd be able to cover a lot of territory (faces) very quickly. Provided there's not much of a breeze, of course.
Anyone know what the weather was like at this event?
It's not just silent, it's unpredictable.
I've just sent two emails from my own server to my Hotmail account. The first was with one of those short .wmv videos as an attachment (3.5Mb), the second was the same email, but without the attachment.
The email with the video went through, while the second one, with identical text but no attachment, has vanished.