They spent their development resources on useless features and changes for the sake of lockin, not stuff people actually wanted, not even security. Thus their software fell behind, and the code base became so bloated and thrashed that it took more work just to keep up with bit rot.
Precisely. Microsoft lost on two counts, both self-imposed, and they are getting what they deserve.
They emphasized crap to lock users in instead of real cutting edge development, which is not fun for developers or users, and which generates crap code, twisted beyond comprehension, byzantine, ugly. IBM had this same problem as a result of their anti-trust shenanigans, and apparently Microsoft chose to repeat history.
Microsoft also emphasized control freakery beyond all reason, in addition to the twiddly feature lockin, what with siccing the BSA on "pirates", horrible copy protection, license verification requiring internet access to run, on and on, making use of their software more and more hassle. The message was clear -- go somewhere else.
People would put up with either of these to some extent, but the combination made them simply not worth the hassle. Crap products which make life difficult are dead products.
All they had to do was stay bleeding edge, drop the lockin featuritis, and compete on quality. They'd have the market sewn up.
And you are fool enough to get table and column and all sorts of schema names from user input? Building strings is not the problem -- building strings from user input is the problem.
The faster you fly, the more lift (goes by the square) and the higher you can fly, which is where the air is thinner and less draggy. You also want to climb and descend as abruptly as possible to be out of the draggy thick air and in the thin air. But engines need air too. It's not a simple tradeoff.
The fees for adding on the fees for adding on the fees need calculus to calculate correctly, and since there are so many variations on the fees, a canned list won't so. Thus we need to make sure that all ticket agents know calculus!!!!!
Run the cracking code in your hypervisor to see if you can break into yourself. If you can, then you are the real hypervisor, because malware would close the security hole intact once it's cracked into you.
Thanks mainly to Nixon in the 1970s and NAFTA in the 1990s, those jobs are gone. The foundation they provided is gone. They probably won't come back unless the federal government does the right thing and impose trade barriers against nations that have an oversupply of labor, and unsafe working conditions, and unsuitable wages.
What a ridiculous load of arrogant, narrow minded pablum! I see college taught you how to think rationally.
One of the ways progress happens is to make old jobs easier so the workers can be freed for new jobs. You automate factory jobs, you make jobs easier, everything you can do to require fewer workers for the same output. There's a term for that -- productivity. We now use bulldozers and powered cranes instead of picks and shovels and wheelbarrows, and those are in fact an improvment over sticks, which were an improvment over bare hands.
Tools -- maybe you've heard of them.
The fact that some jobs go overseas is another benefit. Let someone else do the manual labor factory jobs which produce old fashioned items. That frees up the previous workers for new fields, such as building computers, or the programs which run them, or the websites which use them.
There's another aspect you would probably be glad to stay ignorant of. These "foreign" countries are not just producing stuff for the developed countries, but also for themselves. China has an increasingly bigger economy, and has something like a quarter of the world's population. They want the same things the developed countries already have, but in larger quantities. Are you seriously suggesting that they should continue to depend on the developed countries to build them? What would they pay for them with? Or would they just remain on mud houses and not even have shovels and wheelbarrows to build with and not want medecine or cars or computers?
If they are going to use one quarter of the world's cars, computers, and everything else, logic says they should be building one quarter of the worlds stuff. Or maybe you think each country should be self-sufficient in every category? It's a lot more efficient to have cars made by companies who are good at that, as determined by a free market, and if that happens to be China, good for them -- the developed countries have to make something of equal value to trade.
Maybe you should go back to Economics 101 for an education.
There was something connected to that pipe, an oil rig which blew up and burned and that's what caused this mess.
Secondly, how easy do you think it is to steer a new pipe from 5000 feet above and only crappy vision down where you need to connect? It's not only naturally dark, it has all this dark stuff spewing out and hiding it, plus all that stuff spewing out makes for a lot of turbulence, making it that much harder to connect.
Thirdly, what do you think is going to hold that pipe down when it is suddenly pushed up and away by all that stuff spewing out? Remember, it blew away the original pipe which was firmly attached before the blowout.
Tell you what -- go to one of the outlets from a hydroelectric dam, try connecting a pipe to contain the water coming out, and do it from thousands of feet away on a dark night. Report back on your success. We'll still be here...
it is very clear that one of the selling points of the latest Russian missiles is that they can bypass these systems
No, it is very clear that one of the selling points is that they *claim* to bypass those systems. *Can* is definitely not part of the picture. They have *never* been tested in the real world.
The US claims not. These claims too have *never* been tested in the real world.
Marketing vs marketing with no real world experience to back up either one. At best, you could put a bit more faith in the US marketing since its tests are slightly more open to the world than the Russians', but that's pushing it to the limit. Why do you believe one over the other? Do you believe every piece of marketing drivel you see?
Slashdot Mirror
The king is dead. Long live the king!
Microsoft quite simply is too slow.
They spent their development resources on useless features and changes for the sake of lockin, not stuff people actually wanted, not even security. Thus their software fell behind, and the code base became so bloated and thrashed that it took more work just to keep up with bit rot.
They are reaping what they sowed. I weep not.
Precisely. Microsoft lost on two counts, both self-imposed, and they are getting what they deserve.
They emphasized crap to lock users in instead of real cutting edge development, which is not fun for developers or users, and which generates crap code, twisted beyond comprehension, byzantine, ugly. IBM had this same problem as a result of their anti-trust shenanigans, and apparently Microsoft chose to repeat history.
Microsoft also emphasized control freakery beyond all reason, in addition to the twiddly feature lockin, what with siccing the BSA on "pirates", horrible copy protection, license verification requiring internet access to run, on and on, making use of their software more and more hassle. The message was clear -- go somewhere else.
People would put up with either of these to some extent, but the combination made them simply not worth the hassle. Crap products which make life difficult are dead products.
All they had to do was stay bleeding edge, drop the lockin featuritis, and compete on quality. They'd have the market sewn up.
Touche :-)
Are you saying there are slow unicorn enthusiasts?
And you are fool enough to get table and column and all sorts of schema names from user input? Building strings is not the problem -- building strings from user input is the problem.
Page won't even load without setting a cookie. That's silliness enough right there for me.
That's a bloody good joke, sir.
It's very clear.
Scramjets have no moving parts
They certainly do -- the air coming in at Mach 6 and the exhaust leaving even faster. There will be significant wear.
making it illegal to see things.
Is that you, Tom?
The faster you fly, the more lift (goes by the square) and the higher you can fly, which is where the air is thinner and less draggy. You also want to climb and descend as abruptly as possible to be out of the draggy thick air and in the thin air. But engines need air too. It's not a simple tradeoff.
The fees for adding on the fees for adding on the fees need calculus to calculate correctly, and since there are so many variations on the fees, a canned list won't so. Thus we need to make sure that all ticket agents know calculus!!!!!
Until someone knocks your elbow or kicks the book out from under the corner table leg...
Run the cracking code in your hypervisor to see if you can break into yourself. If you can, then you are the real hypervisor, because malware would close the security hole intact once it's cracked into you.
Everyone can have tons of reasons they break the law. It doesn't make it okay though.
It's the other way round. Just because something is illegal doesn't make it not ok.
Thanks mainly to Nixon in the 1970s and NAFTA in the 1990s, those jobs are gone. The foundation they provided is gone. They probably won't come back unless the federal government does the right thing and impose trade barriers against nations that have an oversupply of labor, and unsafe working conditions, and unsuitable wages.
What a ridiculous load of arrogant, narrow minded pablum! I see college taught you how to think rationally.
One of the ways progress happens is to make old jobs easier so the workers can be freed for new jobs. You automate factory jobs, you make jobs easier, everything you can do to require fewer workers for the same output. There's a term for that -- productivity. We now use bulldozers and powered cranes instead of picks and shovels and wheelbarrows, and those are in fact an improvment over sticks, which were an improvment over bare hands.
Tools -- maybe you've heard of them.
The fact that some jobs go overseas is another benefit. Let someone else do the manual labor factory jobs which produce old fashioned items. That frees up the previous workers for new fields, such as building computers, or the programs which run them, or the websites which use them.
There's another aspect you would probably be glad to stay ignorant of. These "foreign" countries are not just producing stuff for the developed countries, but also for themselves. China has an increasingly bigger economy, and has something like a quarter of the world's population. They want the same things the developed countries already have, but in larger quantities. Are you seriously suggesting that they should continue to depend on the developed countries to build them? What would they pay for them with? Or would they just remain on mud houses and not even have shovels and wheelbarrows to build with and not want medecine or cars or computers?
If they are going to use one quarter of the world's cars, computers, and everything else, logic says they should be building one quarter of the worlds stuff. Or maybe you think each country should be self-sufficient in every category? It's a lot more efficient to have cars made by companies who are good at that, as determined by a free market, and if that happens to be China, good for them -- the developed countries have to make something of equal value to trade.
Maybe you should go back to Economics 101 for an education.
There was something connected to that pipe, an oil rig which blew up and burned and that's what caused this mess.
Secondly, how easy do you think it is to steer a new pipe from 5000 feet above and only crappy vision down where you need to connect? It's not only naturally dark, it has all this dark stuff spewing out and hiding it, plus all that stuff spewing out makes for a lot of turbulence, making it that much harder to connect.
Thirdly, what do you think is going to hold that pipe down when it is suddenly pushed up and away by all that stuff spewing out? Remember, it blew away the original pipe which was firmly attached before the blowout.
Tell you what -- go to one of the outlets from a hydroelectric dam, try connecting a pipe to contain the water coming out, and do it from thousands of feet away on a dark night. Report back on your success. We'll still be here ...
They are metric feet.
Sounds like the pot roast calling the kettle stew past the sell-by date.
You damn punk planets and your baggy pants. Where's my M1 when I need it?
Solar Sails
You should probably find a new hobby. Trolling is meant to make the other person look foolish.
How's about something more than your say-so?
Get sick and tired of people making excuses for Steve Jobs, blaming everybody else for mistreating the poor defenseless man. It's just not true.
That should be the punishment -- fry, fry, fry. I know what the smoker should be.
it is very clear that one of the selling points of the latest Russian missiles is that they can bypass these systems
No, it is very clear that one of the selling points is that they *claim* to bypass those systems. *Can* is definitely not part of the picture. They have *never* been tested in the real world.
The US claims not. These claims too have *never* been tested in the real world.
Marketing vs marketing with no real world experience to back up either one. At best, you could put a bit more faith in the US marketing since its tests are slightly more open to the world than the Russians', but that's pushing it to the limit. Why do you believe one over the other? Do you believe every piece of marketing drivel you see?