WinNT has supported ARM for a long time. Just not publically. So nothing new there.
[citation needed]
I was under the impression that only Windows CE and its brethren supported ARM. Back in the day NT4 could run on x86, MIPS, PowerPC and DEC Alpha, but at the time ARM wasn't a feasible architecture for running Windows NT.
These are all their core bread and butter; how are you going to claim that "most of their products were bought, copied, stolen" when their biggest and most important brands were done in-house?
Its the periphery that they buy-- ntbackup, iexplore, Microsoft AntiSpyware (before Security Essentials / defender), etc.
You need to dig through the history books a bit more, there's a considerable amount of now-irrelevant software from the days of DOS and the early origins of Windows NT, going all the way back to MS-DOS 1.0 itself - the product that provided the foundation of their empire.
Please. Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard to develop an OS. Then through hard work, good timing, and shrewd business sense he made himself the richest man in the world. And then you come along and write some trite comment on Slashdot like you know everything. Let's see you do better, then you can talk.
Bill Gates developed a BASIC interpreter and dropped out of Harvard. Then, with a relatively insignificant amount of money, dumb luck, and shrewd business sense, purchased someone else's operating system and made himself the richest man in the world. And you come along and write some erroneous comment on Slashdot like you know everything.
Microsoft has done very little when it comes to innovation. Their history is filled with their inability to remain at the leading edge of software, and rather than developing the technologies to remain in the lead they simply bought out or sued their competition into oblivion. They also had a habit of taking other people's work and corrupting it to further bind people to their operating systems.
Very few Microsoft products that exist today cannot be traced back to some other company's efforts somewhere in their history.
... they are now pretending they own everything people put there?
No, they are being granted a license to use what people put there. There is a difference.
Maybe it's time for law enforcement to get involved with these clowns and hit them with fraud for pretending to have a secure service.
Yes someone better call the Internet Police and... oh wait. This comment doesn't even make sense. Call which law enforcement exactly? And for what charge? "I don't like their Terms of Service" isn't, as far as I'm aware, something any country's laws have a charge for. You don't like the terms, you don't use the service.
Okay, technically six if you expand the acronym. Nintendo's End User License Agreement for the 3DS handheld has done enough damage to turn me off of any and all future products they may try to peddle. It may cause some dismay with my children (two boys, both in the prime target audience age range) but I've already explained the why of it in an attempt to make them aware of how some companies seem determined to completely alienate their customers (such as the recent Capcom idiocy over Resident Evil, a franchise they both are fans of). Neither of these companies will see another cent out of our pockets.
We are talking about the base OS here. Yes, Windows was cheaper... what? Cheaper than VAX/VMS? Cheaper than Cray? Fact is, Windows was the only game in town on PCs (aside of DOS,) and the PC market was exploding.
OS/2 1.0 was announced in April 1987 and released in December as a textmode-only OS.
The promised Graphical User Interface (GUI), Presentation Manager, was introduced with OS/2 1.1 in October, 1988.
The interface was replaced in versions 1.2 and 1.3 by a tweaked GUI closer in appearance to Windows 3.1.
OS/2 2.0 was released in April 1992.
"Microsoft purchased a license for Version 7 Unix from AT&T in 1979, and announced on August 25, 1980 that it would make it available for the 16-bit microcomputer market. The initial port of Xenix was to the Zilog Z8000 series and subsequently to the Intel 8086/8088 architecture ported by The Santa Cruz Operation." - Xenix.
Of course, none of them mattered in the end, but Microsoft Windows didn't really become relevant until 3.0/3.1 (1990/92 respectively).
Windows had no reason to compete with UNIX - I personally haven't even seen UNIX until - what was it - 1991? -
Anecdotal, yes, but I grew up using a UNIX-alike Operating System (QNX on the Unisys ICON) all through grade school (starting around 1986 or so). Ignoring the Commodore computers I played with previous to it, the ICON was the first computer I really learned anything on. The point being that for every person who personally haven't even seen UNIX, there's one like me who did.
but I certainly saw Windows far before that, since I was setting up Windows for Workgroups in 198*.
Pity you never licensed that time-travel technology you must have been in possession of...
"Windows for Workgroups 3.1 (originally codenamed Winball and later Sparta), released in October 1992,..." - Windows for Workgroups.
Windows 3.0 was released in 1990, while the first version of Word for Windows was released in 1989. Previous versions of Windows were downright awful. So were subsequent versions, but that's a matter of opinion rather than an universally accepted fact.
If you're going to reboot a universe, do it like Doctor Who did it, and not like Star Trek. Respect the decades of canon, and you have a built in fan base. Change the authors, the visual style, whatever, just don't mess with canon.
The "new" Doctor Who is the "old" Doctor Who, regenerated. It's not a reboot, merely a continuation.
Bioshock 2 was on sale 2 days ago for $5. There is a 4 day 2k games sale going on right now. Today you can get borderlands for $5
Thanks for the heads-up. I usually only run Steam when I want to play something, and only buy games when they're on sale because I'm a cheap bugger. Already own Borderlands and the first 2 DLC after buying the DVD versions, and later kicked myself in the arse for not purchasing it through Steam. The $7.95 US I paid for the GOTY Edition (which includes all 4 DLC) is likely cheaper than what I would have to pay if I wanted the additional 2 DLC I didn't yet own.
Not that it's a great game or anything, but it's enjoyable enough to fire up and blast things for an hour or two.
Actually, they released Half Life, Half Life Opposing Force, Blue Shift, and did a lot of work on Counterstrike and a few similar mods, as well as half of the groundwork for Half Life 2 All before Steam got into the content delivery business.
OpFor and Blue Shift were developed by Gearbox Software, not Valve, as well as Counterstrike: Condition Zero and various Half-Life ports and some non-PC expansions. (see Gearbox)
(so much so that it makes Portal 1 look almost like a tech demo)
I'm also pretty sure I read somewhere that Portal essentially was a tech demo, although I cannot be sure of that (and couldn't find a citation in the limited time I devoted to searching for one before posting this).
Keep a history of all the bullshitty things a company has done to users. Apple and Microsoft would have reams of instance of screwing with the company.
Granted it's not aimed directly at users, but in the end it's the users who are screwed.
According to Microsoft today, the Nook, which uses Android as its base operating system, violates five Microsoft-held patents on such innovative inventions like "Loading status in a hypermedia browser having a limited available display area" (Patent #6,339,780).
DOS/Windows gave people more control over their computers. people had the software locally and could install anything they wanted. anytime.
And absolutely no protection whatsoever in the case of DOS and the non-NT Windows'. The simplest program could take down the OS or damage the system.
same with my iphone. i have all the files local on my laptop. if apple pulls an app then i can still use it. all i do is add the.app file in itunes and it will still sync. if someone breaks an app with an update i can still use the old version if i keep all the files.
Funny, but from everything I've read about the iPhone, and know about Apple, this is absolutely not true at all. You possess the device, but Apple owns it and can do pretty much whatever they please with it, including remotely removing software, unless you take extra measures to circumvent this.
with android the app install process is in the cloud and controlled by google
This makes me question whether you actually know anything about Android devices, or if you're just another Apple fanboy posting nonsense while waiting in the Steve Jobs fellatio line.
Of course, I'm in the equivalent Google line. I own an Android phone and for the most part I love it. My phone's rooted, but only so I could remove most of the bloatware my carrier threw on it. Installing software from outside the Marketplace is as easy as downloading a package file and running it.
I peeked at the library with dumpbin; looks like it intercepts performance/debug related functions (likely replacing them with stubs) and passes the rest along to the real DirectX.
Section contains the following exports for D3D9.dll
00000000 characteristics
4A76778D time date stamp Mon Aug 03 01:37:17 2009
0.00 version
1 ordinal base
13 number of functions
13 number of names
And yet Bethesda never completely fixes their games. Ever.
Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3 and now New Vegas (not to mention their old DOS TES games). They receive a handful of patches that mostly fix issues with scripts, leaving the game engine seemingly untouched. I remember being disappointed with FO3 when one of the patches was released where, according to the patch notes, all they did was add a few achievements!
They are great story tellers, and quite adept at crafting expansive and interesting worlds that draw you in, but their programmers certainly leave much to be desired.
I wonder how much blame can be placed upon the engine they license. I also wish that someone like Carmack offered some sort of consultation service to whip cappy code, and coders, into shape.
Take Stargate universe. Before the first episode came on TV (or PC) I read somewhere it would have more drama. I watched the first episode, saw them coming through the stargate on the ship far away, and it was going so slowly (pauses between one, and the next coming through) with such camera work, that I said to myself "they were right, it IS more drama. Also, the faces of the actors told me enough, esp. one of the women (Chloe?), damn, that's just straight "as the world turns" material.
Please cancel stargate universe or put in a daytime slot and say it's a soap opera. It's not sci-fi, it's interesting/good drama, it's just boring, pathetic soap opera rubbish.
I could not disagree more. Yes there's drama, and maybe it's a teensy weensy bit soap opera'ish, but the science-fiction part is thoroughly enjoyable. The cast is great, the acting is great, and the production values are great. Your comment about the camera work doesn't strike me as being "more drama", rather it's comes across to me as better film making. SG:U is more serious and less campy (not that Stargate was ever really camp, save for a few episodes here and there) than its predecessors.
I've heard the "language evolves" argument before, but in this case I disagree. The word "hacker" did not evolve, it is a misnomer. It is not evolution, it is ignorance. It bothers me in an OCD way because so many of my idols are/were hackers, and to me the title is one of borderline reverence for the things they have accomplished.
I am also surprised at my post being moderated flamebait. I was aiming for informative or insightful. I would have thought that on/. of all places my comment would have been appreciated and agreed with. Oh well, the times they are a changin'.
Slashdot Mirror
Will it have three seashells?
The thig would happily run on my desktop with 128K RAM. It was stable.
128K RAM?
Wow, Win2K musta been amazing! Pity I went from 98 to XP, coulda saved a lot of cash in hardware upgrades.
WinNT has supported ARM for a long time. Just not publically. So nothing new there.
[citation needed]
I was under the impression that only Windows CE and its brethren supported ARM. Back in the day NT4 could run on x86, MIPS, PowerPC and DEC Alpha, but at the time ARM wasn't a feasible architecture for running Windows NT.
Landspeeders are unarmed and womprats are just over 2 meters across. It's like hitting a deer.
Civilian landspeeders are unarmed, but not the military models.
You want to menace womprats, you need a T-16 Skyhopper...
First thing that went through my head when I read the summary. I need to get out more.
These are all their core bread and butter; how are you going to claim that "most of their products were bought, copied, stolen" when their biggest and most important brands were done in-house?
Its the periphery that they buy-- ntbackup, iexplore, Microsoft AntiSpyware (before Security Essentials / defender), etc.
You need to dig through the history books a bit more, there's a considerable amount of now-irrelevant software from the days of DOS and the early origins of Windows NT, going all the way back to MS-DOS 1.0 itself - the product that provided the foundation of their empire.
Please. Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard to develop an OS. Then through hard work, good timing, and shrewd business sense he made himself the richest man in the world. And then you come along and write some trite comment on Slashdot like you know everything. Let's see you do better, then you can talk.
Bill Gates developed a BASIC interpreter and dropped out of Harvard. Then, with a relatively insignificant amount of money, dumb luck, and shrewd business sense, purchased someone else's operating system and made himself the richest man in the world. And you come along and write some erroneous comment on Slashdot like you know everything.
Microsoft has done very little when it comes to innovation. Their history is filled with their inability to remain at the leading edge of software, and rather than developing the technologies to remain in the lead they simply bought out or sued their competition into oblivion. They also had a habit of taking other people's work and corrupting it to further bind people to their operating systems.
Very few Microsoft products that exist today cannot be traced back to some other company's efforts somewhere in their history.
No, they are being granted a license to use what people put there. There is a difference.
Maybe it's time for law enforcement to get involved with these clowns and hit them with fraud for pretending to have a secure service.
Yes someone better call the Internet Police and ... oh wait. This comment doesn't even make sense. Call which law enforcement exactly? And for what charge? "I don't like their Terms of Service" isn't, as far as I'm aware, something any country's laws have a charge for. You don't like the terms, you don't use the service.
Three words...
Nintendo 3DS EULA.
Okay, technically six if you expand the acronym. Nintendo's End User License Agreement for the 3DS handheld has done enough damage to turn me off of any and all future products they may try to peddle. It may cause some dismay with my children (two boys, both in the prime target audience age range) but I've already explained the why of it in an attempt to make them aware of how some companies seem determined to completely alienate their customers (such as the recent Capcom idiocy over Resident Evil, a franchise they both are fans of). Neither of these companies will see another cent out of our pockets.
We are talking about the base OS here. Yes, Windows was cheaper ... what? Cheaper than VAX/VMS? Cheaper than Cray? Fact is, Windows was the only game in town on PCs (aside of DOS,) and the PC market was exploding.
OS/2 1.0 was announced in April 1987 and released in December as a textmode-only OS.
The promised Graphical User Interface (GUI), Presentation Manager, was introduced with OS/2 1.1 in October, 1988.
The interface was replaced in versions 1.2 and 1.3 by a tweaked GUI closer in appearance to Windows 3.1.
OS/2 2.0 was released in April 1992.
"Microsoft purchased a license for Version 7 Unix from AT&T in 1979, and announced on August 25, 1980 that it would make it available for the 16-bit microcomputer market. The initial port of Xenix was to the Zilog Z8000 series and subsequently to the Intel 8086/8088 architecture ported by The Santa Cruz Operation." - Xenix.
There was also Coherent.
Of course, none of them mattered in the end, but Microsoft Windows didn't really become relevant until 3.0/3.1 (1990/92 respectively).
Windows had no reason to compete with UNIX - I personally haven't even seen UNIX until - what was it - 1991? -
Anecdotal, yes, but I grew up using a UNIX-alike Operating System (QNX on the Unisys ICON) all through grade school (starting around 1986 or so). Ignoring the Commodore computers I played with previous to it, the ICON was the first computer I really learned anything on. The point being that for every person who personally haven't even seen UNIX, there's one like me who did.
but I certainly saw Windows far before that, since I was setting up Windows for Workgroups in 198*.
Pity you never licensed that time-travel technology you must have been in possession of...
"Windows for Workgroups 3.1 (originally codenamed Winball and later Sparta), released in October 1992, ..." - Windows for Workgroups.
Windows 3.0 was released in 1990, while the first version of Word for Windows was released in 1989. Previous versions of Windows were downright awful. So were subsequent versions, but that's a matter of opinion rather than an universally accepted fact.
No, it means it will make shitty music and eventually shoot itself in the face.
If you're going to reboot a universe, do it like Doctor Who did it, and not like Star Trek. Respect the decades of canon, and you have a built in fan base. Change the authors, the visual style, whatever, just don't mess with canon.
The "new" Doctor Who is the "old" Doctor Who, regenerated. It's not a reboot, merely a continuation.
Bioshock 2 was on sale 2 days ago for $5. There is a 4 day 2k games sale going on right now. Today you can get borderlands for $5
Thanks for the heads-up. I usually only run Steam when I want to play something, and only buy games when they're on sale because I'm a cheap bugger. Already own Borderlands and the first 2 DLC after buying the DVD versions, and later kicked myself in the arse for not purchasing it through Steam. The $7.95 US I paid for the GOTY Edition (which includes all 4 DLC) is likely cheaper than what I would have to pay if I wanted the additional 2 DLC I didn't yet own.
Not that it's a great game or anything, but it's enjoyable enough to fire up and blast things for an hour or two.
Actually, they released Half Life, Half Life Opposing Force, Blue Shift, and did a lot of work on Counterstrike and a few similar mods, as well as half of the groundwork for Half Life 2 All before Steam got into the content delivery business.
OpFor and Blue Shift were developed by Gearbox Software, not Valve, as well as Counterstrike: Condition Zero and various Half-Life ports and some non-PC expansions. (see Gearbox)
(so much so that it makes Portal 1 look almost like a tech demo)
I'm also pretty sure I read somewhere that Portal essentially was a tech demo, although I cannot be sure of that (and couldn't find a citation in the limited time I devoted to searching for one before posting this).
A Russian friend of mine has posted this absolutely amazing story.
These people are easily amazed.
Keep a history of all the bullshitty things a company has done to users. Apple and Microsoft would have reams of instance of screwing with the company.
Groklaw?
Granted it's not aimed directly at users, but in the end it's the users who are screwed.
According to Microsoft today, the Nook, which uses Android as its base operating system, violates five Microsoft-held patents on such innovative inventions like "Loading status in a hypermedia browser having a limited available display area" (Patent #6,339,780).
Robocop. Although it was "I'd buy that..." not "I'll..."
Oh, come on, mods, do you think it responsible to mod up flamebait comments like this as insightful?
Besides, I thought everyone knew that Babylon 5 is the best show of all time.
I'm sorry, but you are both mistaken. Farscape was far superior to both.
It will be hard for anything else to beat this for the dumbest thing I've seen on the internet today.
A CHALLENGER APPEARS!
Canada bans Dire Straits' "Money for Nothing"
Replying to myself because, damn it, that's a Bogus Journey reference.
Oh well, I tried.
You ugly, red, source of all evil!
It works if you picture Steve Ballmer's sweaty, engorged face as he screams "developers!"
DOS/Windows gave people more control over their computers. people had the software locally and could install anything they wanted. anytime.
And absolutely no protection whatsoever in the case of DOS and the non-NT Windows'. The simplest program could take down the OS or damage the system.
same with my iphone. i have all the files local on my laptop. if apple pulls an app then i can still use it. all i do is add the .app file in itunes and it will still sync. if someone breaks an app with an update i can still use the old version if i keep all the files.
Funny, but from everything I've read about the iPhone, and know about Apple, this is absolutely not true at all. You possess the device, but Apple owns it and can do pretty much whatever they please with it, including remotely removing software, unless you take extra measures to circumvent this.
with android the app install process is in the cloud and controlled by google
This makes me question whether you actually know anything about Android devices, or if you're just another Apple fanboy posting nonsense while waiting in the Steve Jobs fellatio line.
Of course, I'm in the equivalent Google line. I own an Android phone and for the most part I love it. My phone's rooted, but only so I could remove most of the bloatware my carrier threw on it. Installing software from outside the Marketplace is as easy as downloading a package file and running it.
I peeked at the library with dumpbin; looks like it intercepts performance/debug related functions (likely replacing them with stubs) and passes the rest along to the real DirectX.
Section contains the following exports for D3D9.dll
00000000 characteristics
4A76778D time date stamp Mon Aug 03 01:37:17 2009
0.00 version
1 ordinal base
13 number of functions
13 number of names
ordinal hint RVA name
4 0 00001090 D3DPERF_BeginEvent
5 1 000010A0 D3DPERF_EndEvent
6 2 000010B0 D3DPERF_GetStatus
7 3 000010B0 D3DPERF_QueryRepeatFrame
8 4 000010C0 D3DPERF_SetMarker
9 5 000010D0 D3DPERF_SetOptions
10 6 000010C0 D3DPERF_SetRegion
11 7 000010E0 DebugSetLevel
12 8 000010E0 DebugSetMute
13 9 00001050 Direct3DCreate9
1 A 000010B0 Direct3DShaderValidatorCreate9
2 B 000010E0 PSGPError
3 C 000010E0 PSGPSampleTexture
And yet Bethesda never completely fixes their games. Ever.
Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3 and now New Vegas (not to mention their old DOS TES games). They receive a handful of patches that mostly fix issues with scripts, leaving the game engine seemingly untouched. I remember being disappointed with FO3 when one of the patches was released where, according to the patch notes, all they did was add a few achievements!
They are great story tellers, and quite adept at crafting expansive and interesting worlds that draw you in, but their programmers certainly leave much to be desired.
I wonder how much blame can be placed upon the engine they license. I also wish that someone like Carmack offered some sort of consultation service to whip cappy code, and coders, into shape.
Take Stargate universe. Before the first episode came on TV (or PC) I read somewhere it would have more drama. I watched the first episode, saw them coming through the stargate on the ship far away, and it was going so slowly (pauses between one, and the next coming through) with such camera work, that I said to myself "they were right, it IS more drama. Also, the faces of the actors told me enough, esp. one of the women (Chloe?), damn, that's just straight "as the world turns" material.
Please cancel stargate universe or put in a daytime slot and say it's a soap opera. It's not sci-fi, it's interesting/good drama, it's just boring, pathetic soap opera rubbish.
I could not disagree more. Yes there's drama, and maybe it's a teensy weensy bit soap opera'ish, but the science-fiction part is thoroughly enjoyable. The cast is great, the acting is great, and the production values are great. Your comment about the camera work doesn't strike me as being "more drama", rather it's comes across to me as better film making. SG:U is more serious and less campy (not that Stargate was ever really camp, save for a few episodes here and there) than its predecessors.
I've heard the "language evolves" argument before, but in this case I disagree. The word "hacker" did not evolve, it is a misnomer. It is not evolution, it is ignorance. It bothers me in an OCD way because so many of my idols are/were hackers, and to me the title is one of borderline reverence for the things they have accomplished.
I am also surprised at my post being moderated flamebait. I was aiming for informative or insightful. I would have thought that on /. of all places my comment would have been appreciated and agreed with. Oh well, the times they are a changin'.