It's because they have a monopolyI am sick and tired of this horseshit platitude. Windows is not by any reasonable definition a monopoly. Do valid, usable alternatives exist? YES. Do people use them? YES. Is Microsoft forcibly preventing people from using alternatives? NO. The fact that so many people can go on and on about how "Microsoft is D-O-O-O-MED!" and "OSX cleans Windows' clock!" while simultaneously mouthing bromides about Microsoft being an unaccountable monopoly proves that Orwell was right about the ability for people to hold self-contradictory thoughts.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that UNC resources should not use backslashes, only forward slashes. Thus your link should be file://K:/Some Directory/somefile.iso. In my version of Outlook, at least (2003), this gets auto-linkified when I type it.
What possible reason is there to encode what to do with a file in it's name, EXCEPT to confuse people?
Because it's highly portable and simple to edit. Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I like being able to look at a simple list of files and be able to know what the default shell action is for those files, and I like being able to change that default shell action simply by renaming the file. I certainly don't want to use filesystem metadata (limiting it to filesystems that implement that metadata mechanism), "shadow" files, or some other ridiculous hack.
In Windows, its valid to have myfilename.bar and MyFileName.bar in the same folder.
It is? It may be valid in NTFS, but unless you are making NTFS API calls, it is AFAIK impossible to create two identically-named (disregarding case) files in Windows. Just as an example:
Isn't it illegal for a minor to enter into a contract. Something like "corrupt a minor" or some such law?
No. But it is voidable, if the contract is not for "necessities." So presumably, a minor could argue that the licensing agreement was void, even if they clicked "I agree," and use the software in ways prohibited by the license.
I think it's more likely that Vietnam simply offers a less epic scope. It was a proxy war, and the enemies just lacked that inherent evil awfulness that the Nazis had, and our motives were less than clear, reducing the "good vs. evil" dynamic that makes for compelling storylines. Also, WWII was on a huge scale, with practically every conceivable form of fighting was represented, and over a huge variety of landscapes and cities, giving designers lots of material to work with. In comparison, Vietnam battle types would be limited to infantry squad fighting and patrol boating, all taking place in either jungle or rice paddies. Finally, WWII was the last "total war" we have fought, with truly massive battles and relatively straightfoward strategy, and clear victories and losses. The Vietnam battles would be and endless series of skirmishes without any clear goals or much way to define "winning" or "losing", and I can see how that could easily be boring or frustrating to play.
That said, it would be a different kind of FPS if they did it right - the player as an American commander in VietNam, where you have to make ethical decisions about who to fight (with lots of noncombatants or ambiguously aligned personnel), what villages to destroy, and what kind of force to use, all of which affect your ability to achieve some kind of overally strategic goal, like territorial pacification.
I'm sure that their player will use the Janus DRM (aka "PlaysForSure"). It's the defacto non-Apple audio DRM standard. I would like this, inasmuch as there are >1 music stores that could support it. The real question is what formats it will be able to play in addition to WMA. If it can't play MP3, AAC, OGG, and FLAC, it's not terribly useful to me.
I met a hippie from an urban land
Who said: A vast and empty store of glass
Stands in the city. Near it, on the asphalt,
Half sunk, a shattered picture lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its photographer well those passions read,
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed,
And on the advertisement these words appear:
"My name is Steve Jobs, King of Consumer Electronics:
Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, lightless and bare
The lone and level streets stretch far away.
Government do have plans to use it at some point though. Why should every citizen have to pay a microsoft tax (e.g. buy a copy of Microsoft office) in order to read documents produced by their own government?
That's a lame argument for three reasons.
Microsoft provides free Office document viewers for this very reason.
These things would come with probably extremely toxic non-refillable containers that are guaranteed to be emptied out at the most inopportune moment.
You're not thinking like a businessman. The drives will be cheap - cheaper than the competition, anyways. Enough to make it look like a good deal, anyways. It's the semimonthly proprietary branded cartridges of drive oil that will cost a small fortune...
Yeah, probably very slight. You know they love to cram as much of Windows (as-is) as they can into everything they do, no matter how stupid that is
That's baloney. I never would have guessed that the factory navigational system in my Honda runs Windows Automotive, because you never see as much as a single logo, but it does, and it works great.
Slashdot Mirror
Assume the plant, the research and development has been paid for and the obvious thing must be stated...
How is this a remotely valid assumption, given that RAM chips have seen orders of magnitude increases in speed and capacity?
Who is this Major Wii and why is EA supporting him?
US federal law does not have a 'reasonable dfinition of a monopoly'
No. It is not reasonable. The law is unreasonably vague, rests on unreasonable moral premises, and is unreasonably abitrarily enforced.
It's because they have a monopolyI am sick and tired of this horseshit platitude. Windows is not by any reasonable definition a monopoly. Do valid, usable alternatives exist? YES. Do people use them? YES. Is Microsoft forcibly preventing people from using alternatives? NO. The fact that so many people can go on and on about how "Microsoft is D-O-O-O-MED!" and "OSX cleans Windows' clock!" while simultaneously mouthing bromides about Microsoft being an unaccountable monopoly proves that Orwell was right about the ability for people to hold self-contradictory thoughts.
Something that is by its very design impossible with current versions of Windows.
Can you justify this statement? What is inherent in the design that makes this impossible?
If you're using VB.NET, you can use the self-referant!
If typo Then Me.shoot(foot)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that UNC resources should not use backslashes, only forward slashes. Thus your link should be file://K:/Some Directory/somefile.iso. In my version of Outlook, at least (2003), this gets auto-linkified when I type it.
Because it's highly portable and simple to edit. Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I like being able to look at a simple list of files and be able to know what the default shell action is for those files, and I like being able to change that default shell action simply by renaming the file. I certainly don't want to use filesystem metadata (limiting it to filesystems that implement that metadata mechanism), "shadow" files, or some other ridiculous hack.
In Windows, its valid to have myfilename.bar and MyFileName.bar in the same folder.
It is? It may be valid in NTFS, but unless you are making NTFS API calls, it is AFAIK impossible to create two identically-named (disregarding case) files in Windows. Just as an example:
This results in one file (text.txt) containing "Test Two".So you're saying you can imagine no possible scenario where you might want to use different applications to edit different text files?
Are you still using Windows 3.1 by any chance? Because I haven't observed this behavior in about a decade.
No.
Isn't it illegal for a minor to enter into a contract. Something like "corrupt a minor" or some such law?
No. But it is voidable, if the contract is not for "necessities." So presumably, a minor could argue that the licensing agreement was void, even if they clicked "I agree," and use the software in ways prohibited by the license.
That said, it would be a different kind of FPS if they did it right - the player as an American commander in VietNam, where you have to make ethical decisions about who to fight (with lots of noncombatants or ambiguously aligned personnel), what villages to destroy, and what kind of force to use, all of which affect your ability to achieve some kind of overally strategic goal, like territorial pacification.
I'm sure that their player will use the Janus DRM (aka "PlaysForSure"). It's the defacto non-Apple audio DRM standard. I would like this, inasmuch as there are >1 music stores that could support it. The real question is what formats it will be able to play in addition to WMA. If it can't play MP3, AAC, OGG, and FLAC, it's not terribly useful to me.
--Apologies to Percy Bysshe Shelley
Government do have plans to use it at some point though. Why should every citizen have to pay a microsoft tax (e.g. buy a copy of Microsoft office) in order to read documents produced by their own government?
That's a lame argument for three reasons.
Microsoft provides free Office document viewers for this very reason.
Well, in the Simpsons skit it was an "inanimate" carbon rod.
These things would come with probably extremely toxic non-refillable containers that are guaranteed to be emptied out at the most inopportune moment.
You're not thinking like a businessman. The drives will be cheap - cheaper than the competition, anyways. Enough to make it look like a good deal, anyways. It's the semimonthly proprietary branded cartridges of drive oil that will cost a small fortune...
Why the hell does a command-line tool require .NET 2.0, especially if it's just parsing a text file?
Uh...for the same reason that command line tools written in Java require a JRE?
Wait--that was sarcasm, wasn't it?
Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Yes.
Well, since the project is BSD licensed, what's to stop you from fixing it?
Yes, it's certainly not very polished. It's almost like it's a 0.1 Alpha release or something.
Yeah, probably very slight. You know they love to cram as much of Windows (as-is) as they can into everything they do, no matter how stupid that is
That's baloney. I never would have guessed that the factory navigational system in my Honda runs Windows Automotive, because you never see as much as a single logo, but it does, and it works great.
Why do you think it's being demanded by government offices all over the world so soon after becoming a draft?
Why, for the same reason that all government offices make any decision, of course: because it's the sensible, logical, cost-effective thing to do.