Not to mention OEMs, if you're a high volume PC makers it's hard to be allowed to sell machines with either Windows or Linux installed. It's either Windows only or Linux and other non MS OSes.
As soon as you start offering non-MS operating systems they put the boot in.
There was a nice response to Ballmer's laughter on another site carrying this news. It mentioned that this shows that Microsoft has a tight grip on the desktop world. It shows that many desktop users are using Windows on the basis that Microsoft has made it hard for them to run anything else. Therefore Ballmer is laughing because he realises Microsoft's monopolistic doings are paying off.
People keep saying "should be done like Gentoo" or "Debian is like this".What Ian is trying to say is everyone needs to cooperate on this and build a framework which all distros can use.
In my eyes one of the problems Linux has is libraries and their versions. you can't simply take an executable and guarantee it will run on another Linux installation (unless you statically link).
He singles out Linux and BSD, yet people write some appallingly bad software for Windows using highly custom GUIs. At least most things use GTK or QT on Linux/BSDs.
But I do agree that there's way too many applications with bad GUI design. But then there's also too many pieces of open-source software that have vast numbers of config options. Take samba for instance, why can't it configure itself by discovering what it in use on your network? you could have the option for it to "learn" or manually configure if your network is a tricky one.
I don't ever remember having to spend so long setting up a Windows network, it just usually works. I'm now a seasoned pro at setting up Samba, but I still think that if software is made more clever that humans can devote their time to better things.
Well that's the thing, the more realistic you want your game to look the more real world dynamics you have to include. It's not simple math either, it's all real numbers in three dimensions.
Then you have polygon characters to make (itself a skill), textures, scenery and collision maps, etc... never mind actually thinking of a decent idea for a game.
It's not impossible, but a commercial quality game in the 80s would be knocked up by one or two people (and perhaps someone else would do the music, see C64) in a few months. You now have the situation where it can be a year or more and a group of people numbering 10-15.
A good insight into how things were at the start of the home computer revolution.
People take things like RAM, disk space and CPU cycles for granted these days. A readme file for a piece of software these days is likely to be bigger than a game on some of the first 8-bit home computers.
One thing that is sad is how 3D games programming is out of the reach of the hobbyist these days. Purely down to the complexity of modern games, they take too long to create if one person tries to do all the work. Then there's the SDK and development hardware required if you want to develop for a console.
would be to have most things accessible in one panel which can be hidden and revealed with the space bar. TV Paint was like this and you could use almost the entire screen for drawing instead of a dinky Window.
Well they know they don't have to as there's no real competition to Centrino. Maybe if AMD came up with something similar and released source then Intel would reconsider.
Get XP or Win2k, they're a lot more stable than Windows 98. You can properly kill off tasks with no fuss and they come with NTFS which is a much more rugged filesystem than FAT32.
I moved to Windows 2000 as soon as I possibly could back in the days when I ran Windows as my desktop. Windows 98 was a nightmare once you had a config problem.
I've toyed with QT designer, it's a good bit of software.
I'd sooner see QT and KDE win over Gnome and GTK. When I first started running Linux I used Gnome and GMC was ok but Nautilus crashed. I left Linux for a while and next time I installed it I used KDE, I found it much nicer and I've stuck with Linux and KDE ever since.
It's actually just a style that makes them both look more consistant. Unifying the API is the hardest job and I don't really want to see a unified API as it would be a bit of a mongrel. To me I think the best way forward is for either QT or KDE to die and the developers of the losing project to join the winning side.
Merging QT and KDE would be like merging Linux and one of the BSDs.
Always found that StartupMonitor is useful for seeing what crud is trying to add itself to your Run registry key (so it starts up when you log on or boot up). Sometimes the installer for an app will ask you to reboot, this can often be when the spyware will work its way in. So by intercepting the creation of registry key entries in Run you can often stop the spyware.
Well since many companies are finding that sorting and reading email too be too much work I feel it's becoming less important for certain businesses. Forums have taken their place to an extent when dealing with technical problems.
You could argue that buffer overflow hacks are partly the fault of the CPU since Intel and PPC chips can't fully protect against buffer overflow attacks (when using OpenBSD).
Except Word doesn't do exactly what they want. They want better support for their language and Microsoft wouldn't play ball. Such decisions at Microsoft are always economically based where as at OpenOffice such decisions are based on (a) if it's possible and (b) if someone can do it.
Would be quicker to boot a computer if hibernation was used all the time. Ok you'd have to recreate a RAM image everytime you installed new hardware or updated OS components, but that could be done automatically by the OS.
If Microsoft could reduce the size of patches then they could create a tool that creates a list of downloads required. This list could be placed on a USB memory card, then another tool could be used on a PC with all the patches installed (and a net connection). This tool would download all the patches onto the memory card. The patches could then be installed on the new PC, which could then be connected to the net safely.
I share your love for the C64
on
First Computers
·
· Score: 1
Which is probably why I have two C64s and a C128, plus Frodo on my phone. No need to remember when you can still use the computers. I just hope they last as some of the logic ICs used in the 80s were of the programmable type (PALs?) and have a limited life.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention OEMs, if you're a high volume PC makers it's hard to be allowed to sell machines with either Windows or Linux installed. It's either Windows only or Linux and other non MS OSes.
As soon as you start offering non-MS operating systems they put the boot in.
There was a nice response to Ballmer's laughter on another site carrying this news. It mentioned that this shows that Microsoft has a tight grip on the desktop world. It shows that many desktop users are using Windows on the basis that Microsoft has made it hard for them to run anything else. Therefore Ballmer is laughing because he realises Microsoft's monopolistic doings are paying off.
People keep saying "should be done like Gentoo" or "Debian is like this".What Ian is trying to say is everyone needs to cooperate on this and build a framework which all distros can use.
In my eyes one of the problems Linux has is libraries and their versions. you can't simply take an executable and guarantee it will run on another Linux installation (unless you statically link).
He singles out Linux and BSD, yet people write some appallingly bad software for Windows using highly custom GUIs. At least most things use GTK or QT on Linux/BSDs.
But I do agree that there's way too many applications with bad GUI design. But then there's also too many pieces of open-source software that have vast numbers of config options. Take samba for instance, why can't it configure itself by discovering what it in use on your network? you could have the option for it to "learn" or manually configure if your network is a tricky one.
I don't ever remember having to spend so long setting up a Windows network, it just usually works. I'm now a seasoned pro at setting up Samba, but I still think that if software is made more clever that humans can devote their time to better things.
Well that's the thing, the more realistic you want your game to look the more real world dynamics you have to include. It's not simple math either, it's all real numbers in three dimensions.
Then you have polygon characters to make (itself a skill), textures, scenery and collision maps, etc... never mind actually thinking of a decent idea for a game.
It's not impossible, but a commercial quality game in the 80s would be knocked up by one or two people (and perhaps someone else would do the music, see C64) in a few months. You now have the situation where it can be a year or more and a group of people numbering 10-15.
A good insight into how things were at the start of the home computer revolution.
People take things like RAM, disk space and CPU cycles for granted these days. A readme file for a piece of software these days is likely to be bigger than a game on some of the first 8-bit home computers.
One thing that is sad is how 3D games programming is out of the reach of the hobbyist these days. Purely down to the complexity of modern games, they take too long to create if one person tries to do all the work. Then there's the SDK and development hardware required if you want to develop for a console.
would be to have most things accessible in one panel which can be hidden and revealed with the space bar. TV Paint was like this and you could use almost the entire screen for drawing instead of a dinky Window.
Well they know they don't have to as there's no real competition to Centrino. Maybe if AMD came up with something similar and released source then Intel would reconsider.
But I bet Dell still pays Microsoft a fee when they sell a FreeDOS PC.
Get XP or Win2k, they're a lot more stable than Windows 98. You can properly kill off tasks with no fuss and they come with NTFS which is a much more rugged filesystem than FAT32.
I moved to Windows 2000 as soon as I possibly could back in the days when I ran Windows as my desktop. Windows 98 was a nightmare once you had a config problem.
I've toyed with QT designer, it's a good bit of software.
I'd sooner see QT and KDE win over Gnome and GTK. When I first started running Linux I used Gnome and GMC was ok but Nautilus crashed. I left Linux for a while and next time I installed it I used KDE, I found it much nicer and I've stuck with Linux and KDE ever since.
Replace KDE with GTK, sorry I have KDE on the brain :)
It's actually just a style that makes them both look more consistant. Unifying the API is the hardest job and I don't really want to see a unified API as it would be a bit of a mongrel. To me I think the best way forward is for either QT or KDE to die and the developers of the losing project to join the winning side.
Merging QT and KDE would be like merging Linux and one of the BSDs.
Always found that StartupMonitor is useful for seeing what crud is trying to add itself to your Run registry key (so it starts up when you log on or boot up). Sometimes the installer for an app will ask you to reboot, this can often be when the spyware will work its way in. So by intercepting the creation of registry key entries in Run you can often stop the spyware.
Google for startupmonitor, it's a useful tool.
Well since many companies are finding that sorting and reading email too be too much work I feel it's becoming less important for certain businesses. Forums have taken their place to an extent when dealing with technical problems.
A governing body that only cares about serving big business and not its citizens.
Email used to be a good tool for keeping in touch with people before spam. It's probably more useful for individuals than many businesses.
Programmers of designers?
You could argue that buffer overflow hacks are partly the fault of the CPU since Intel and PPC chips can't fully protect against buffer overflow attacks (when using OpenBSD).
These won't be popular but:
* Make net software hard to use, release as source code
* Make getting an internet connection tricky, do a criminal record check (Look at Ralsky, he was convicted of something).
* Overhaul SMTP and email.
Except Word doesn't do exactly what they want. They want better support for their language and Microsoft wouldn't play ball. Such decisions at Microsoft are always economically based where as at OpenOffice such decisions are based on (a) if it's possible and (b) if someone can do it.
Would be quicker to boot a computer if hibernation was used all the time. Ok you'd have to recreate a RAM image everytime you installed new hardware or updated OS components, but that could be done automatically by the OS.
Except it wasn't funded by any government, it was a private venture. Some musicians and other rich folk donated the money.
It's a mountain not a dormant volcano :)
Well Microsoft admitted they needed to reduce update sizes and have planned to reduce sizes by 30%
Story here
If they supply the entire DLL file instead of patches then that bloats the size of a patch.
If Microsoft could reduce the size of patches then they could create a tool that creates a list of downloads required. This list could be placed on a USB memory card, then another tool could be used on a PC with all the patches installed (and a net connection). This tool would download all the patches onto the memory card. The patches could then be installed on the new PC, which could then be connected to the net safely.
Which is probably why I have two C64s and a C128, plus Frodo on my phone. No need to remember when you can still use the computers. I just hope they last as some of the logic ICs used in the 80s were of the programmable type (PALs?) and have a limited life.