Do you really think the gripe about "business practices" has anything remotely to do with buying other businesses? No, the complaint made is about what they see as anti-competitive moves, not buying companies. Whether that's correct or incorrect, that's the perception that they have, a perception that didn't come because of business buyouts.
Not being a gamer, I can't comment on the controller issue, though I do think the console itself is much better than the enormous size of the previous XBox.
This XBox isn't too bad on it's own. I think not setting it on it's side would have been a better choice though. I'm neutral on the white, it has the potential to work, if the picture was better it'd be easier to say. The only problem is, compared to the huge black beast that is the first XBox, this could look kinda wimpy.
I'm hardly a "typical Microsoftie". Heck, I don't even use Windows anymore on non-work PC's. And I love how you selectively quote me. If you read what I wrote, I said this was a good move. A better move would be to fix the core problems, but until then this stop-gap is better than where we were previously.
The brain damaged part has nothing to do with TCP/IP, because their implementation has nothing to do with security.
Seriously? You really think it's their brain damaged TCP/IP implementation that's at fault? Think again. It may be bad, but giving every program access to raw sockets is a bit silly considering how easy it is to get programs into Windows. But this is a good move, a better one would to have been to make it so it's not as simple to get untrusted programs running in Windows but I digress.
I'm knocking the press and users who claim that it's the most un-friggin-believable super cool new awesome enhacement ever, when it's just a simple UI tweak that's been used many times before.
We all know that spotlight isn't the best thing since sliced bread, it's (essentially) grep with a database and a few other niceties. That isn't the groundbreaking part. The groundbreaking part is they tied those pieces together in a nice UI so that everybody could use it.
Even though Microsoft introduced indexed search to Windows a while back, it takes special parameters to get to it. Apple, on the other hand, made it easy to use and a huge part of the system. Nothing terribly interesting technically, but the users and the press love that.
Personally, I think the best thing Microsoft could have done would have been to create a simple patch to go with SP2 that would make searching use the index. Sure, it would have lacked niceties like being integrated with other programs or with the OS. But tt wouldn't be too hard, and it would have been a competitive edge over Apple so when Tiger rolled out they could say, "We've already been doing this!" But, I guess that would have eaten into Longhorn. I would think, though, that it'd be better to eat into your own OS than let a competitor do it, but that's just my two cents.
Read Gibson's site, it is most informative. In answer to your question, my understanding (based on my recollection of his site) is that raw sockets are used not as a tool to distribute viruses, but as a way to attack sites and do other ReallyBadThings.(tm) Read up on it here.
Actually, I think that's a matter of what PDF reading software you use. Adobe reader 7 is substantially better then 6, and Preview on OS X is even better. (though lacks support for some of the more "out there" elements of PDF files)
By supporting GIMP MS would admit that open source software can be made to the same standard as proprietary software and that their TCO arguments are bullshit.
No it wouldn't. While such a thing would mean that MSFT would be acknowledging that open source has a legitimate place, they could still argue against Linux's TCO. In other words, this would mean that yes they would have to stop attacking open source in general, but that doesn't stop them from claiming that Linux specifically has poor TCO.
The "agenda" could also be good publicity. But I really don't buy that for a second as reality, but if you're worried about an agenda (like the parent) then I'd think that's a lot more likely.
Automator:
VB/VBScript/VBA (look up SendKeys)
Windows Scripting Host since Windows 2000
Windows Management Instrumentation since Windows XP
That's comparable to AppleScript, not Automator. The point of Automator is that you don't *have* to program at all to get these results, making it simpler for non programmers to get more out of their Mac's. Windows doesn't have a counterpart to Automator today, and I've never heard of a counterpart being planned for Longhorn.
Expose: definitely a plus for OSX simply because it looks cool, but Windows' taskbar is definitely HCI-wise superior (and renders an Expose-on-Windows unnecessary simply because it is _way_ more discoverable.
Again, not really comparable. The dock is more comparable to the taskbar than Expose is. There are advantages and disadvantages to both.
There, that's enough counter-groupthink for one day. Bring on the flames.
Another item to consider is that Apple doesn't do things radically different, but slightly different. When they created Spotlight they did things easily enough, create an indexing system with plugins for other app developers. When Microsoft does it... they redo everything. Look at.Net. Look at WinFS. instead of "merely" indexing the whole filesystem (which gives the same impression to end users as practically a whole new filesystem) they chose to go overboard and change the way the filesystem works. Apple's way is more sustainable, because it relies on small improvements over time that add up. Microsoft seems to want to change everything with each release rather than build on the previous iteration. (and before someone says anything, there are exceptions on both sides)
Slashdot Mirror
It's backwards so the aliens will understand it.
FYI: Google has 2x more space, as Google currently offers 2GB and counting.
Do you really think the gripe about "business practices" has anything remotely to do with buying other businesses? No, the complaint made is about what they see as anti-competitive moves, not buying companies. Whether that's correct or incorrect, that's the perception that they have, a perception that didn't come because of business buyouts.
Huge PDF on Slashdot. This can't end well. Mirror
Not being a gamer, I can't comment on the controller issue, though I do think the console itself is much better than the enormous size of the previous XBox.
This XBox isn't too bad on it's own. I think not setting it on it's side would have been a better choice though. I'm neutral on the white, it has the potential to work, if the picture was better it'd be easier to say. The only problem is, compared to the huge black beast that is the first XBox, this could look kinda wimpy.
Hence why it's "5, Funny" not, "5, Informative" :)
Unless, of course, MSFT is the one to make the faulty FTP server.
(not saying that's the case, though)
I'm hardly a "typical Microsoftie". Heck, I don't even use Windows anymore on non-work PC's. And I love how you selectively quote me. If you read what I wrote, I said this was a good move. A better move would be to fix the core problems, but until then this stop-gap is better than where we were previously.
The brain damaged part has nothing to do with TCP/IP, because their implementation has nothing to do with security.
Seriously? You really think it's their brain damaged TCP/IP implementation that's at fault? Think again. It may be bad, but giving every program access to raw sockets is a bit silly considering how easy it is to get programs into Windows. But this is a good move, a better one would to have been to make it so it's not as simple to get untrusted programs running in Windows but I digress.
We all know that spotlight isn't the best thing since sliced bread, it's (essentially) grep with a database and a few other niceties. That isn't the groundbreaking part. The groundbreaking part is they tied those pieces together in a nice UI so that everybody could use it.
Even though Microsoft introduced indexed search to Windows a while back, it takes special parameters to get to it. Apple, on the other hand, made it easy to use and a huge part of the system. Nothing terribly interesting technically, but the users and the press love that.
Personally, I think the best thing Microsoft could have done would have been to create a simple patch to go with SP2 that would make searching use the index. Sure, it would have lacked niceties like being integrated with other programs or with the OS. But tt wouldn't be too hard, and it would have been a competitive edge over Apple so when Tiger rolled out they could say, "We've already been doing this!" But, I guess that would have eaten into Longhorn. I would think, though, that it'd be better to eat into your own OS than let a competitor do it, but that's just my two cents.
Read Gibson's site, it is most informative. In answer to your question, my understanding (based on my recollection of his site) is that raw sockets are used not as a tool to distribute viruses, but as a way to attack sites and do other ReallyBadThings.(tm) Read up on it here.
Actually, I think that's a matter of what PDF reading software you use. Adobe reader 7 is substantially better then 6, and Preview on OS X is even better. (though lacks support for some of the more "out there" elements of PDF files)
No it wouldn't. While such a thing would mean that MSFT would be acknowledging that open source has a legitimate place, they could still argue against Linux's TCO. In other words, this would mean that yes they would have to stop attacking open source in general, but that doesn't stop them from claiming that Linux specifically has poor TCO.
If it catches on, then the free market will have decided it's worth something. (barring, of course, any illegal tweaking by MSFT, of course)
The "agenda" could also be good publicity. But I really don't buy that for a second as reality, but if you're worried about an agenda (like the parent) then I'd think that's a lot more likely.
VB/VBScript/VBA (look up SendKeys)
Windows Scripting Host since Windows 2000
Windows Management Instrumentation since Windows XP
That's comparable to AppleScript, not Automator. The point of Automator is that you don't *have* to program at all to get these results, making it simpler for non programmers to get more out of their Mac's. Windows doesn't have a counterpart to Automator today, and I've never heard of a counterpart being planned for Longhorn.
Expose: definitely a plus for OSX simply because it looks cool, but Windows' taskbar is definitely HCI-wise superior (and renders an Expose-on-Windows unnecessary simply because it is _way_ more discoverable.Again, not really comparable. The dock is more comparable to the taskbar than Expose is. There are advantages and disadvantages to both.
There, that's enough counter-groupthink for one day. Bring on the flames.No, it's just groupthink of another kind.
Another item to consider is that Apple doesn't do things radically different, but slightly different. When they created Spotlight they did things easily enough, create an indexing system with plugins for other app developers. When Microsoft does it... they redo everything. Look at .Net. Look at WinFS. instead of "merely" indexing the whole filesystem (which gives the same impression to end users as practically a whole new filesystem) they chose to go overboard and change the way the filesystem works. Apple's way is more sustainable, because it relies on small improvements over time that add up. Microsoft seems to want to change everything with each release rather than build on the previous iteration. (and before someone says anything, there are exceptions on both sides)
You spent $3,800 based on an unconfirmed tidbit from here, and not based on what Apple says?
>>[DING] "Heat, Alex" "Correct, for $100."
:)
Incorrect, you didn't phrase your answer in the form of a question.
./'ed already.
How would these other nations be able to encrypt/decrypt the passport data if the nations are banned from the algorithms?
Well, no. Images/external scripts don't get prefetched, just the html file.
Only if every 56k'er is a Mozilla user, which wouldn't bet that bad :)
.htaccess [i]is[/i] a server configuration file(Apache).