so does that mean Creative invented the treeview, or the database search?
No, not at all. Much like adding "on the internet" to the end of an existing idea creates a whole new patentable idea, simply adding "on a portable device" also creates a whole new patentable idea.;)
Not to mention possibly clogging up vital pieces of infrastructure that would be most needed in an emergency...
"We're sorry, your call cannot be completed as dialed, this cell node is currently attempting to send 104,000 SMS messages..."
They obviously don't understand that the cell network is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck. It's a series of tubes. And they don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when they put those message in, everything is going to be delayed.
No kidding. I saw the BBC's _The Office_, and I was appalled by what I saw was a scathing indictment of the Kafkaesque futility and nihilism in modern-day small-town England. Then someone told me it was a comedy and that I was supposed to laugh at it.
I felt exactly the same way and was worried I was the only one.
Microsoft has not yet finalised plans to make the most commercial success out of WinFS. Making it part of a highly pirated OS doesn't make commercial sense.
Expending effort and money to make any features for a pirated OS doesn't make sense, and yet MS continues to make and give away Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, Visual Studio Express, etc for free. Why would WinFS be any differerent?
Lack of features in a rebranded OS doesn't imply loss of sales / profits either. Improved features doesn't imply more profits from the OS business as well.
Are you actually trying to argue that having or not having features has no effect on profits? Don't tell marketing that because they constantly try to sell products on features. Apparently they think customers want features.
And so, until MS dcides whether to package WinFS as part of SQL or.Net or Active Directory or the Aero interface or BSOD... we'll have to wait and see.
We don't have to wait to find out becaues we can read the blog of the (former?) WinFS team where one of their posts tells us clearly that WinFS will be "productized" in SQL and NOT elsewhere. http://blogs.msdn.com/winfs/archive/2006/06/23/644 706.aspx
Not to be a pro-MS shill, but supporting PDF over XPS is kind of like appls vs. apples.
Sure, if you completely overlook the fact that I (and pretty much everyone else) already have a PDF viewer installed. I (and pretty much everyone else) do NOT have an XPS viewer installed.
This argument drives me nuts. They're not selling you the paper on which the book was printed. They are selling you the entertainment/knowledge/whatever you derive from the content of the book.
That means that Libraries are stealing because they give away the knowledge for free. It also means that if I accidentally destroy a book by leaving it in the rain I should be able to pick up a new paper copy from the bookstore for free because I already bought and own the knowledge.
That's the problem with 'intellectual property'. It has to exist in a physical medium somewhere (book, CD, hard drive, etc) and up to this point in history we've had a one-to-one relationship between the physical medium and the 'license' to the knowledge. Now that we can copy a bunch of bits from one physical medium to another with virtually no cost the 'medium is the license' breaks down and we're going to have to think of a new model.
Maybe they aren't switching because they have to buy all new hardware and then learn a new OS and applications. This is exactly why Bootcamp is useful -- users who are considering buying new hardware, but aren't sure about switching OS's can dual-boot and try out OS X.
So let me get this straight. People bitch and moan about Vista because there will be nothing new and they bitch and moan about Office 2007 because too much is new.
People are bitching about Vista because new functionality like WinFS was dropped, but a new skin was added -- the buttons are all in the same place, they just look different. People bitch about Office because the UI was totally altered (not just reskinned) and the Classic interface is gone. The buttons look a lot different and they're not in the same place they used to be.
Why should Microsoft document and publicize the innermost workings of its OS for the benefit of a (competing) third party?
1) it's not "the innermost workings", it's just a communication protocol. nobody is suggesting they give away the code for their implementation, just that they provide documents about how the protocol works
2) it's not for the benefit of the third party, it's for the benefit of the consumer
What is it that you need so bad from Vista other than 3d desktop graphics?
Oh, I don't know.. how about a metadata querying file system? That would be a huge benefit to business users who dump all of their documents into My Documents. How long did it take Apple to do it and why is it taking Microsoft so much longer?
If the.org or.co.uk part is essentially arbitrary (I have.org,.com and.net all pointing at the same site just so that someone else doesn't grab them), then wouldn't it make way more sense to just leave it out?
Now you can get any paper in the entire world daily and all for the same price (some for free). So which will you choose?
For international news this makes sense, but some people are still going to want local news. The current model of having actual reporters for local news and just using content from Reuters for international seems to work.
What's the deal with the "x" button not exiting the application? What is making it different than "_" minimize in most cases? Why on earth is "x" different than file->exit? Thats one thing I can't get used to.
I switched to a Mac at home a year ago and this took me a while to get used to, but now I like it better. For example, when I close the last tab in $WEBBROWSER I don't usually want the whole application to close, I just want to close the last tab and I'll open a new tab later. Same with an application like Photoshop -- I might be closing the current document, but I'm going to open another one after.
Next, why is there no good launch bar mechanism? Am I missing some feature that is there?
I find the Applications folder more useful than the Start Menu because it's easier to navigate inside one folder than through layers of menus (Start Menu->Company Name->Application Name->Application). In the Applications folder you can type the first couple letters to get to the application you want, recognize it more easily because the icon is not small and blurry and then start it by pressing cmd-down_arrow -- all without using the mouse. Quicksilver allows you to do it even easier.
And lastly, what is with the insane anti-aliasing?
I guess this is personal preference, but I happen to find that Windows fonts look awfully blocky most of the time, particularly Times and MS Sans Serif. If you really don't like the a-a, I believe you can turn it off in System Preferences.
Slashdot Mirror
so does that mean Creative invented the treeview, or the database search?
;)
No, not at all. Much like adding "on the internet" to the end of an existing idea creates a whole new patentable idea, simply adding "on a portable device" also creates a whole new patentable idea.
I've got your better example right here. Take a look at the suggestion; they're obviously not taking context into consideration:
s px?siteId=0&tab=0&query=WM_SETPOSITION
http://search.msdn.microsoft.com/search/default.a
Not to mention possibly clogging up vital pieces of infrastructure that would be most needed in an emergency...
"We're sorry, your call cannot be completed as dialed, this cell node is currently attempting to send 104,000 SMS messages..."
They obviously don't understand that the cell network is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck. It's a series of tubes. And they don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when they put those message in, everything is going to be delayed.
No kidding. I saw the BBC's _The Office_, and I was appalled by what I saw was a scathing indictment of the Kafkaesque futility and nihilism in modern-day small-town England. Then someone told me it was a comedy and that I was supposed to laugh at it.
I felt exactly the same way and was worried I was the only one.
Microsoft has not yet finalised plans to make the most commercial success out of WinFS. Making it part of a highly pirated OS doesn't make commercial sense.
.Net or Active Directory or the Aero interface or BSOD... we'll have to wait and see.
4 706.aspx
Expending effort and money to make any features for a pirated OS doesn't make sense, and yet MS continues to make and give away Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, Visual Studio Express, etc for free. Why would WinFS be any differerent?
Lack of features in a rebranded OS doesn't imply loss of sales / profits either. Improved features doesn't imply more profits from the OS business as well.
Are you actually trying to argue that having or not having features has no effect on profits? Don't tell marketing that because they constantly try to sell products on features. Apparently they think customers want features.
And so, until MS dcides whether to package WinFS as part of SQL or
We don't have to wait to find out becaues we can read the blog of the (former?) WinFS team where one of their posts tells us clearly that WinFS will be "productized" in SQL and NOT elsewhere.
http://blogs.msdn.com/winfs/archive/2006/06/23/64
robots need to interact with the most illogical lifeform on the planet - Man!
Microsoft makes the most illogical software on the planet, so it's a perfect match!</sarcasm>
and corporations cannot contribute a dime to political parties or candidates
.. ah .. college funds to their favourite candidate.
But their kids are allowed to contribute their
Not to be a pro-MS shill, but supporting PDF over XPS is kind of like appls vs. apples.
Sure, if you completely overlook the fact that I (and pretty much everyone else) already have a PDF viewer installed. I (and pretty much everyone else) do NOT have an XPS viewer installed.
This argument drives me nuts. They're not selling you the paper on which the book was printed. They are selling you the entertainment/knowledge/whatever you derive from the content of the book.
That means that Libraries are stealing because they give away the knowledge for free. It also means that if I accidentally destroy a book by leaving it in the rain I should be able to pick up a new paper copy from the bookstore for free because I already bought and own the knowledge.
That's the problem with 'intellectual property'. It has to exist in a physical medium somewhere (book, CD, hard drive, etc) and up to this point in history we've had a one-to-one relationship between the physical medium and the 'license' to the knowledge. Now that we can copy a bunch of bits from one physical medium to another with virtually no cost the 'medium is the license' breaks down and we're going to have to think of a new model.
Maybe they aren't switching because they have to buy all new hardware and then learn a new OS and applications. This is exactly why Bootcamp is useful -- users who are considering buying new hardware, but aren't sure about switching OS's can dual-boot and try out OS X.
So let me get this straight. People bitch and moan about Vista because there will be nothing new and they bitch and moan about Office 2007 because too much is new.
People are bitching about Vista because new functionality like WinFS was dropped, but a new skin was added -- the buttons are all in the same place, they just look different. People bitch about Office because the UI was totally altered (not just reskinned) and the Classic interface is gone. The buttons look a lot different and they're not in the same place they used to be.
Why should Microsoft document and publicize the innermost workings of its OS for the benefit of a (competing) third party?
1) it's not "the innermost workings", it's just a communication protocol. nobody is suggesting they give away the code for their implementation, just that they provide documents about how the protocol works
2) it's not for the benefit of the third party, it's for the benefit of the consumer
What is it that you need so bad from Vista other than 3d desktop graphics?
Oh, I don't know.. how about a metadata querying file system? That would be a huge benefit to business users who dump all of their documents into My Documents. How long did it take Apple to do it and why is it taking Microsoft so much longer?
Microsoft would have to be insane to create a bunch of different versions of Vista.
They are releasing seven different versions, so maybe they are insane.
If the .org or .co.uk part is essentially arbitrary (I have .org, .com and .net all pointing at the same site just so that someone else doesn't grab them), then wouldn't it make way more sense to just leave it out?
http://slashdot/
http://google/
http://apple/
http://microsoft/
etc..
Its better than the alternative: Lawyers.
The third alternative is to drop two lawyers into a ring armed with two-by-fours with rusty nails. The one who lives wins!
It's kids not knowing about the volume control until it's too late.
Nah nah nah... I can't hear you!!
No, really.... I can't...
How about a WikiStrategy for Iraq?
The first rule of the Iraqi strategy is there is no strategy..
Now you can get any paper in the entire world daily and all for the same price (some for free). So which will you choose?
For international news this makes sense, but some people are still going to want local news. The current model of having actual reporters for local news and just using content from Reuters for international seems to work.
Must be past the end of the Paper Boy Era. ... Now people drive past and chuck papers in the general vicinity of doors.
Nah, it's not they end -- they just need more training.
What's the deal with the "x" button not exiting the application? What is making it different than "_" minimize in most cases? Why on earth is "x" different than file->exit? Thats one thing I can't get used to.
I switched to a Mac at home a year ago and this took me a while to get used to, but now I like it better. For example, when I close the last tab in $WEBBROWSER I don't usually want the whole application to close, I just want to close the last tab and I'll open a new tab later. Same with an application like Photoshop -- I might be closing the current document, but I'm going to open another one after.
Next, why is there no good launch bar mechanism? Am I missing some feature that is there?
I find the Applications folder more useful than the Start Menu because it's easier to navigate inside one folder than through layers of menus (Start Menu->Company Name->Application Name->Application). In the Applications folder you can type the first couple letters to get to the application you want, recognize it more easily because the icon is not small and blurry and then start it by pressing cmd-down_arrow -- all without using the mouse. Quicksilver allows you to do it even easier.
And lastly, what is with the insane anti-aliasing?
I guess this is personal preference, but I happen to find that Windows fonts look awfully blocky most of the time, particularly Times and MS Sans Serif. If you really don't like the a-a, I believe you can turn it off in System Preferences.
Isn't it obvious that RIAA already flips a coin on all it's studies? Of course, they use two-headed coins... :)
And both of those heads are still jammed firmly up their asses...
What you're saying is the the bible is the longest running telephone game in history? That explains a lot..
Get a whole truckload of salt on one easy dose of iSalt(tm)!
Grammar? Who the how are what the, Harry Potter?