Just some of the horror stories I have read about all the incompatibility and the problems with just using the interface was enough.
Hmm.. I didn't think reading stories counted as research anymore, but I guess it does nowadays. Of course the majority of Vista users without problems are not out on the messages boards singing its praises, they (like me) are simply using their computer and find it more pleasent than XP.
I did however have an coworker who received a new laptop with Vista on it and we have had nothing but problems with it. Our printers wouldn't install and I cannot believe how overly complicated they made it to find anything in the operating system.
Ahh, one test machine and you've written off Vista. I had print drivers that don't install, but that's because the manufactor hasn't released any Vista drivers for the printer. Personally, I've found things are better orgainized in Vista than with XP, once I figured out how they set it up.
It's unbelievable what they have compromised just so they can have flashy graphics and smooth looking buttons. It all boils down to one thing in the end however, I just don't see any benefit to upgrading any time soon so therefore there's no reason to.
OS makers have a tough time selling their product. It IS more secure and more locked down (I've hit this when doing my everyday development on Vista). I've also read some technical artciles about what is more restricted in Vista. So I'm included to say they are there.
Unfortunately all most people see is the new UI. Its the only part of the OS you interact with, even though there are quite a few new features in there. Building applications on the new UI IS going to be much easier for me.. no longer do I have to fork out money just to get a context menu that can have a textbox in it.. I can put one together myself easily.
At any rate, I'm not posting to say you should upgrade or that I think you need Vista right now.. my main objective was to point out flaws in your reasoning used to tell your boss not to buy Vista; nothing you've posted about indicates that you did any kind of real evaluation at all, and I think that you need to be called out on that.
I think collecting "evidence" which is stored for "later use" is a pretty big step to a police state. Their objection seems to be the fact that they are tracking people who are not even suspected of anything.
You realize of course that not all Americans buy American cars. Also, a few YouTube postings hardly count as anything, let alone as evidence of whatever you're trying to prove.
Well, the reason is that we have a belief that the punishment should fit the crime. If you stole something from me, you've harmed me in some way. If you attempted to steal something, you didn't harm me as much, but you did do something wrong.
Its the same reason we don't put people to death for stealing a candybar.
Unfortunately very few Americans want a compact car. I've had smaller cars in college, and being tall, they are just not comfortable. Some people also have families or lots of things they need to transport.
That said, if this does manage to do well, perhaps they can look at building a larger car.
Homeowners insurance covers what happens on your property. "Your home" includes not just the structure, but the land and those things reasonable associated with the property (a car parked on the street in front of your house can be the same as if you had the car locked up in the basement. Why talk about homeowners insurance for a car? Homeowners insurance covers items taken from a car broken into while at the home. Well, at least mine does and I think it standard practice, but you should check yours if you are worried about coverage.
I thought we were talking about auto insurance.
He uses the whole complex as if it is his. He parks his car in a spot available to him, does his laundry in a room provided for his use. They may be common areas, but they are still his home. It's no different than if you rented a house with a roomate. His room might not be your room, but both rooms are in the home of the other. Just because you aren't the only one with exclusive use doesn't mean it can't be part of your home.
The common areas in most complexes may as well be considered public. In essence, he left the tapes lying around in a public area. Its not the same as a roommate, because with a roommate you only expect you roommate and those he trusts to also have access.. you don't expect the public at large to have access.
You are correct. The procedure was bad. He followed the procedure and took the care that the procedure indicated (just get them off site). Any failures are not on the part of the intern. If they wanted to have someone with responsibility take care of them, they wouldn't have the procedure of giving them to the least competent person in the company.
So leaving the tapes hidden on a shelf in a grocery store would be following procedure for him?
Well you aren't a judge. And I don't expect my car to be broken into. I'm curious where you live where you expect your car to be broken into.
It doesn't matter where I live, I always lock my car doors. Likewise, I would not leave something valueable in my car at an apartment complex either.
Regardless, the whole thing would be moot if the tapes were properly encrypted.
The whole thing would have been moot as well had he brought the tapes into his unit. He had a part to play in this as well, and its not an excuse for him to simply say the policy sucked. Obviously had he taken the tapes in, there'd be no issue still. Therefore he shares part of the blame.
And why would you think that an apartment where multiple non-residents have the keys to get in is somehow secure? If you assert that sitting in a car is insecure, I will assert that laying on the kitchen counter is insecure. Since he lives in such a high crime area with break-ins and the tapes aren't secure in the car or his apartment, where could he have put them?
You've never lived in an apartment complex have you? Breakins to autos at complexes are much more common than single family homes. The lot may or may not be nearby to the owners of the cars. On the flip side, the building itself is usually more secure. There are more people around in the complex, and someone would more likely notice a person breaking into an apartment than someone would in the parking lot. The tapes would be *more* secure in his apartment than his car. Also, the effort needed to make the tapes moer secure was minimal. That is, its reasonable to expect him to bring the tapes into his actual unit and not leave them in the car.
For security, locking them in his desk would have been the best idea, but he didn't take them for security reasons. He took them to get them out of the building, and the did his job as instructed.
Its implied that he should not allow them to be stolen, would you agree? Would you also agree the tapes would have been *more* secure in his apartment than his car (especially given that it was his car and not his apartment that was broken into)? If you trust your property to another, you don't need to explicitly tell them "make sure no one steals this." Its reasonable to expect that. Its also reasonable to expect that he didn't toss them into his dishwasher.
Re:Unresponsiveness and inaction on /.'s part...
on
Microsoft FUD Watch
·
· Score: 1
I dunno, try reading just about any other thread on/. Sometimes it doesn't even have to be about computers at all for the MS bashing to begin.
I also wonder what this thread will become in the next few hours.
My insurance considers my car parked in the street in front of my house to be exactly the same as if it were parked inside my locked garage (or even parked in the living room).
Well, one of two things. Your insurance company wants to screw you just the same, or they realize that you will sometimes not park your car in the garage everytime.
He took them home, but did not take them inside his home. But, pedanrty aside, his instructions were not explicitly stated. "Take them home with you" means toss them in the car and leave them there. The point was to get them off-site. If they wanted them secure, they'd have provided him with a safe to go in his house. Since they didn't, it was obvious it was a disaster plan (having them away from the office was the sole goal, which he did achieve), and not a security plan.
I don't buy into lawyer speak, I belive in common sense. If you want to be technical, the parking lot outside the building he lives is not his home, nor are any of the other units. Only one unit can be considered his home; he doesn't sleep in the laundry room does he?
I think it also logically follows that if they want the tapes safe from destruction, in which case they lose the backup should it be needed, that they'd also want it safe from theft, in which case they'd lose the backup should it be needed. So either situtation causes the same result, except theft has another wonderful side effect.
When you have someone else's property, for whatever reason, you must take reasonable precautions to ensure the properties safety. That's exactly what a judge would say. Leaving something value in a car in an apartment complex parking lot is not reasonable care.
Again, its a case of free citizens censoring each other, a concept I'm not comfortable with. TOS or not, I don't agree with the censoring of a blogger.
The blogger is clearly off his rocker here; that's the other great thing about free speech. If you let people have it, you let them expose themselves for the nutjobs that they are. I can see that the blogger is way out in left field. Censoring it though instantly makes the message more desirable to be heard. People WANT to hear it now because it is 'banned.' Basic human physcology.
In any case its probably a good idea for you to check and see that I'm not the blogger who had his site removed; I personally can see through his horseshit and understand him for the wackjob he is.
At any rate, why shouldn't google give him a free ride for his garbage when they'll give me a free ride to post pictures of my new kitten? The answer is that they should support free speech.. its also in their best interest. They probably would get more page hits from the blogger than from anything I'd post.
Maybe not, but I think even acting as private citizens we need to let others speak their minds as well. Its very unfortunate that citizens in a supposedly free country want to hide topics or ideas they hate. That's not how a good ciziten of this country is supposed to be acting. I suspect the founders never thought we'd attempt to censor each other on a daily basis.
At any rate, what does the hoster care? They probably get more page hits from controrversy than someone posting about their new puppy.
Re:Unresponsiveness and inaction on /.'s part...
on
Microsoft FUD Watch
·
· Score: 0, Troll
You're right, and thanks for pointing this out. The linux zealots here have taken over and you rarely hear any reasonable arguements. Its most of the reason I don't subscribe; why pay to have pointless arguements with zealots?
As opposed to what? You mean when I did WP in HS, when it was press Apple-B to start bold, type the sentence and Apple-B to close it?
How do you teach using a computer without actually teaching the individual program you're using? FWIW, I learned WP on Apple IIs and later PCs with Word Perfect (DOS).
No it doesn't. They are locked for a reason. Perhaps its our AV software? Either way, its not random. FWIW, Vista allows you the option to Skip the file in question, which I agree is something that should have happened a long time ago.
I don't think its a smart idea though to allow files in use to be deleted. It likely means there's some problem that needs to be corrected.
The Wii is gimmicky because of its controllers? Did you ever stop to think that maybe the simplified controls do actually appeal to alot of people? I had a ton of fun playing Zelda and RE4 with the Wiis controls. They are VERY intitutive and you no longer need to be a great button masher to play games. Blazing Angels is a whole new way to play a flight simulation game.
Why throw away $600 on a console? I could get better graphics out of my computer by upgrading than blowing that much on a console.
Perhaps they did it because they didn't want a program running to be using a specific version of a component, have it unloaded and the next time it loads its a newer version.
You're doing something wrong if this is hitting you all the time during development. I've been developing on Windows for 10 years now, and have not had this features impede my development. Its also trivial to find which process is using the file in question; its called FileMon.
Perhaps you should actually read the artcile you link to. FTFA:
BMW has told CNETAsia that an electronic fault caused the problem, rather than a system crash of the car's Windows-based central computer, as other reports have speculated.
Emphesis mine. You should also find the other poster to this thread that says Windows based cars will outnumber all other car OSes very shortly. Sorry, you're not a fanboy with no facts in reality.
Try to run something that uses 100% CPU and then try to do anything else while that happens. What a great scheduler...
I don't have any problems using 100% CPU; when its doing disk operations though there is a slow down, but you have to expect a program hitting the disk that much will slow up other disk operations.
Also, try to fill up your RAM. Kind of hard, isn't it? Windows doesn't seem to think you have as much RAM as you do and starts to swap far too early to be considered useful. This is why people complain about Firefox using $x amount of RAM; Windows starts to swap way too early and causes slowdowns all around.
People complaining that FF uses too much RAM have two issues; one is that the memory used column in Task manager isn't accurate. The second is that there does seem to be a memory leak in FF. As far as swapping goes, i don't see the OS swapping until it is out of physical RAM. Since you want to talk about disk problems though, perhaps you should try Linux an an AMD x2 chip and see what happens.
Try to delete a file that's in use (something you can do in any Unix-like system). File in use? Whoops, can't do that.
Wow, that's the ONE complain about the FS you have? Big deal.. it doesn't let you delete a file in use. The only really ligitimate use of that "feature" is to hide what your program is doing, which a ligitmate process shouldn't need to do anyway.
Also, Windows has jack shit support for more filesystems than their own FAT and NTFS families (both of which get fragmented; modern filesystems prevent that on the fly). Sure, you can get more support via plugins (I believe there are two different ways to make a filesystem plugin for Windows: kernel and shell), but that isn't as reliable as having native support for them. Windows should at least support FFS (fast filesystem, the UNIX/BSD file system of choice for a few decades).
Again, who cares? Ext2 suffers fragmentation as well. The newest NTFS deals with this as well. How many Linux systems go beyond FAT and ext2/3? Not many I'd image. Support is there, sure, but is it useful to the majority of computer users? Nope. Your fringe case when you need more than a few filesystems supported doesn't make Windows a crap OS.
Java IDEs or VS aside, I'd think that if you're project takes 10 minutes to compile, your project is too big and needs to be seperated out. You'd gain other benefits besides better compile time.
A quick look in \windows\system32 shows the largest application to be the spyware removal tool, and that's large likely because its a single file (defintions included). The other large.dlls are resources for localization. The largets code dll seems to be an nvidia driver, weighing in a 5 MB. The MS dlls are much smaller.
Slashdot Mirror
I never said the OP wasn't right, I just said that posting links to youtube does not prove his point.
Just some of the horror stories I have read about all the incompatibility and the problems with just using the interface was enough.
Hmm.. I didn't think reading stories counted as research anymore, but I guess it does nowadays. Of course the majority of Vista users without problems are not out on the messages boards singing its praises, they (like me) are simply using their computer and find it more pleasent than XP.
I did however have an coworker who received a new laptop with Vista on it and we have had nothing but problems with it. Our printers wouldn't install and I cannot believe how overly complicated they made it to find anything in the operating system.
Ahh, one test machine and you've written off Vista. I had print drivers that don't install, but that's because the manufactor hasn't released any Vista drivers for the printer. Personally, I've found things are better orgainized in Vista than with XP, once I figured out how they set it up.
It's unbelievable what they have compromised just so they can have flashy graphics and smooth looking buttons. It all boils down to one thing in the end however, I just don't see any benefit to upgrading any time soon so therefore there's no reason to.
OS makers have a tough time selling their product. It IS more secure and more locked down (I've hit this when doing my everyday development on Vista). I've also read some technical artciles about what is more restricted in Vista. So I'm included to say they are there.
Unfortunately all most people see is the new UI. Its the only part of the OS you interact with, even though there are quite a few new features in there. Building applications on the new UI IS going to be much easier for me.. no longer do I have to fork out money just to get a context menu that can have a textbox in it.. I can put one together myself easily.
At any rate, I'm not posting to say you should upgrade or that I think you need Vista right now.. my main objective was to point out flaws in your reasoning used to tell your boss not to buy Vista; nothing you've posted about indicates that you did any kind of real evaluation at all, and I think that you need to be called out on that.
I think collecting "evidence" which is stored for "later use" is a pretty big step to a police state. Their objection seems to be the fact that they are tracking people who are not even suspected of anything.
You realize of course that not all Americans buy American cars. Also, a few YouTube postings hardly count as anything, let alone as evidence of whatever you're trying to prove.
Well, the reason is that we have a belief that the punishment should fit the crime. If you stole something from me, you've harmed me in some way. If you attempted to steal something, you didn't harm me as much, but you did do something wrong.
Its the same reason we don't put people to death for stealing a candybar.
Unfortunately very few Americans want a compact car. I've had smaller cars in college, and being tall, they are just not comfortable. Some people also have families or lots of things they need to transport.
That said, if this does manage to do well, perhaps they can look at building a larger car.
Why? Rarely do any of the critics and I agree on what a good movie is.
Homeowners insurance covers what happens on your property. "Your home" includes not just the structure, but the land and those things reasonable associated with the property (a car parked on the street in front of your house can be the same as if you had the car locked up in the basement. Why talk about homeowners insurance for a car? Homeowners insurance covers items taken from a car broken into while at the home. Well, at least mine does and I think it standard practice, but you should check yours if you are worried about coverage.
I thought we were talking about auto insurance.
He uses the whole complex as if it is his. He parks his car in a spot available to him, does his laundry in a room provided for his use. They may be common areas, but they are still his home. It's no different than if you rented a house with a roomate. His room might not be your room, but both rooms are in the home of the other. Just because you aren't the only one with exclusive use doesn't mean it can't be part of your home.
The common areas in most complexes may as well be considered public. In essence, he left the tapes lying around in a public area. Its not the same as a roommate, because with a roommate you only expect you roommate and those he trusts to also have access.. you don't expect the public at large to have access.
You are correct. The procedure was bad. He followed the procedure and took the care that the procedure indicated (just get them off site). Any failures are not on the part of the intern. If they wanted to have someone with responsibility take care of them, they wouldn't have the procedure of giving them to the least competent person in the company.
So leaving the tapes hidden on a shelf in a grocery store would be following procedure for him?
Well you aren't a judge. And I don't expect my car to be broken into. I'm curious where you live where you expect your car to be broken into.
It doesn't matter where I live, I always lock my car doors. Likewise, I would not leave something valueable in my car at an apartment complex either.
Regardless, the whole thing would be moot if the tapes were properly encrypted.
The whole thing would have been moot as well had he brought the tapes into his unit. He had a part to play in this as well, and its not an excuse for him to simply say the policy sucked. Obviously had he taken the tapes in, there'd be no issue still. Therefore he shares part of the blame.
And why would you think that an apartment where multiple non-residents have the keys to get in is somehow secure? If you assert that sitting in a car is insecure, I will assert that laying on the kitchen counter is insecure. Since he lives in such a high crime area with break-ins and the tapes aren't secure in the car or his apartment, where could he have put them?
You've never lived in an apartment complex have you? Breakins to autos at complexes are much more common than single family homes. The lot may or may not be nearby to the owners of the cars. On the flip side, the building itself is usually more secure. There are more people around in the complex, and someone would more likely notice a person breaking into an apartment than someone would in the parking lot. The tapes would be *more* secure in his apartment than his car. Also, the effort needed to make the tapes moer secure was minimal. That is, its reasonable to expect him to bring the tapes into his actual unit and not leave them in the car.
For security, locking them in his desk would have been the best idea, but he didn't take them for security reasons. He took them to get them out of the building, and the did his job as instructed.
Its implied that he should not allow them to be stolen, would you agree? Would you also agree the tapes would have been *more* secure in his apartment than his car (especially given that it was his car and not his apartment that was broken into)? If you trust your property to another, you don't need to explicitly tell them "make sure no one steals this." Its reasonable to expect that. Its also reasonable to expect that he didn't toss them into his dishwasher.
I dunno, try reading just about any other thread on /. Sometimes it doesn't even have to be about computers at all for the MS bashing to begin.
I also wonder what this thread will become in the next few hours.
Lets not forget we were all to happy to sell the to Nazis as well. It was only when GB said it would sink our ships if we didn't stop did we stop..
My insurance considers my car parked in the street in front of my house to be exactly the same as if it were parked inside my locked garage (or even parked in the living room).
Well, one of two things. Your insurance company wants to screw you just the same, or they realize that you will sometimes not park your car in the garage everytime.
He took them home, but did not take them inside his home. But, pedanrty aside, his instructions were not explicitly stated. "Take them home with you" means toss them in the car and leave them there. The point was to get them off-site. If they wanted them secure, they'd have provided him with a safe to go in his house. Since they didn't, it was obvious it was a disaster plan (having them away from the office was the sole goal, which he did achieve), and not a security plan.
I don't buy into lawyer speak, I belive in common sense. If you want to be technical, the parking lot outside the building he lives is not his home, nor are any of the other units. Only one unit can be considered his home; he doesn't sleep in the laundry room does he?
I think it also logically follows that if they want the tapes safe from destruction, in which case they lose the backup should it be needed, that they'd also want it safe from theft, in which case they'd lose the backup should it be needed. So either situtation causes the same result, except theft has another wonderful side effect.
When you have someone else's property, for whatever reason, you must take reasonable precautions to ensure the properties safety. That's exactly what a judge would say. Leaving something value in a car in an apartment complex parking lot is not reasonable care.
Again, its a case of free citizens censoring each other, a concept I'm not comfortable with. TOS or not, I don't agree with the censoring of a blogger.
The blogger is clearly off his rocker here; that's the other great thing about free speech. If you let people have it, you let them expose themselves for the nutjobs that they are. I can see that the blogger is way out in left field. Censoring it though instantly makes the message more desirable to be heard. People WANT to hear it now because it is 'banned.' Basic human physcology.
In any case its probably a good idea for you to check and see that I'm not the blogger who had his site removed; I personally can see through his horseshit and understand him for the wackjob he is.
At any rate, why shouldn't google give him a free ride for his garbage when they'll give me a free ride to post pictures of my new kitten? The answer is that they should support free speech.. its also in their best interest. They probably would get more page hits from the blogger than from anything I'd post.
Maybe not, but I think even acting as private citizens we need to let others speak their minds as well. Its very unfortunate that citizens in a supposedly free country want to hide topics or ideas they hate. That's not how a good ciziten of this country is supposed to be acting. I suspect the founders never thought we'd attempt to censor each other on a daily basis.
At any rate, what does the hoster care? They probably get more page hits from controrversy than someone posting about their new puppy.
You're right, and thanks for pointing this out. The linux zealots here have taken over and you rarely hear any reasonable arguements. Its most of the reason I don't subscribe; why pay to have pointless arguements with zealots?
As opposed to what? You mean when I did WP in HS, when it was press Apple-B to start bold, type the sentence and Apple-B to close it?
How do you teach using a computer without actually teaching the individual program you're using? FWIW, I learned WP on Apple IIs and later PCs with Word Perfect (DOS).
Except that there are FAR more titles on HDDVD than BluRay. Go check for yourself.
Well in a society that respects free speech he has every right to post that trash. Racist speech is protected.
I'd agree if the porn industry wasn't backing HDDVD.
No it doesn't. They are locked for a reason. Perhaps its our AV software? Either way, its not random. FWIW, Vista allows you the option to Skip the file in question, which I agree is something that should have happened a long time ago.
I don't think its a smart idea though to allow files in use to be deleted. It likely means there's some problem that needs to be corrected.
Don't you get sick of copying and pasting this to every thread about the Wii?
The Wii is gimmicky because of its controllers? Did you ever stop to think that maybe the simplified controls do actually appeal to alot of people? I had a ton of fun playing Zelda and RE4 with the Wiis controls. They are VERY intitutive and you no longer need to be a great button masher to play games. Blazing Angels is a whole new way to play a flight simulation game.
Why throw away $600 on a console? I could get better graphics out of my computer by upgrading than blowing that much on a console.
Perhaps they did it because they didn't want a program running to be using a specific version of a component, have it unloaded and the next time it loads its a newer version.
You're doing something wrong if this is hitting you all the time during development. I've been developing on Windows for 10 years now, and have not had this features impede my development. Its also trivial to find which process is using the file in question; its called FileMon.
Perhaps you should actually read the artcile you link to. FTFA:
BMW has told CNETAsia that an electronic fault caused the problem, rather than a system crash of the car's Windows-based central computer, as other reports have speculated.
Emphesis mine. You should also find the other poster to this thread that says Windows based cars will outnumber all other car OSes very shortly. Sorry, you're not a fanboy with no facts in reality.
Try to run something that uses 100% CPU and then try to do anything else while that happens. What a great scheduler...
I don't have any problems using 100% CPU; when its doing disk operations though there is a slow down, but you have to expect a program hitting the disk that much will slow up other disk operations.
Also, try to fill up your RAM. Kind of hard, isn't it? Windows doesn't seem to think you have as much RAM as you do and starts to swap far too early to be considered useful. This is why people complain about Firefox using $x amount of RAM; Windows starts to swap way too early and causes slowdowns all around.
People complaining that FF uses too much RAM have two issues; one is that the memory used column in Task manager isn't accurate. The second is that there does seem to be a memory leak in FF. As far as swapping goes, i don't see the OS swapping until it is out of physical RAM. Since you want to talk about disk problems though, perhaps you should try Linux an an AMD x2 chip and see what happens.
Try to delete a file that's in use (something you can do in any Unix-like system). File in use? Whoops, can't do that.
Wow, that's the ONE complain about the FS you have? Big deal.. it doesn't let you delete a file in use. The only really ligitimate use of that "feature" is to hide what your program is doing, which a ligitmate process shouldn't need to do anyway.
Also, Windows has jack shit support for more filesystems than their own FAT and NTFS families (both of which get fragmented; modern filesystems prevent that on the fly). Sure, you can get more support via plugins (I believe there are two different ways to make a filesystem plugin for Windows: kernel and shell), but that isn't as reliable as having native support for them. Windows should at least support FFS (fast filesystem, the UNIX/BSD file system of choice for a few decades).
Again, who cares? Ext2 suffers fragmentation as well. The newest NTFS deals with this as well. How many Linux systems go beyond FAT and ext2/3? Not many I'd image. Support is there, sure, but is it useful to the majority of computer users? Nope. Your fringe case when you need more than a few filesystems supported doesn't make Windows a crap OS.
Java IDEs or VS aside, I'd think that if you're project takes 10 minutes to compile, your project is too big and needs to be seperated out. You'd gain other benefits besides better compile time.
.dlls are resources for localization. The largets code dll seems to be an nvidia driver, weighing in a 5 MB. The MS dlls are much smaller.
A quick look in \windows\system32 shows the largest application to be the spyware removal tool, and that's large likely because its a single file (defintions included). The other large