Whether it's web services or software rentals, the problem is the same. If a software company wants to change its business model from software sales to software rentals/services, it is a very, very risky choice. Software companies may think that this solution will ensure a continuous income, but this is not necessarily true. The product must be the best of its kind or have no concurrence, otherwise it's finished. The service will be permanently evaluated by the customer who will always have the possibility to switch to a better alternative (cost of switching included) if one appears.
If, as a customer, I buy some software, I'll stick to it even if it's not perfect and the seller is sure of the corresponding sale. However if I rent it once, find it inadequate or find something better or free, that's the end of the game. And if I use intensively the product, I'll try to buy it ( or even buy a concurrent product if the buying option is not offered), not only because of the direct cost but also for keeping the control of a tool I need for my business.
Actually I can imagine this solution very interesting for rarely used, large, expensive and specialized software that would not be bought otherwise. Typically, because I am a small user of a certain product, I'd be really interested in renting for $200 each time I use (once every two months) this $10000 analysis package that I would never buy otherwise.
If Microsoft does this for Windows or Office, whether for corporate or individual customers, it will rapidly loose its dominant position.
This is not a Creative product (...with Microsoft software), it's a hardware extension of Microsoft WMP 10 (...built by Creative).
The list of System Requirements says it all.
I'll buy this kind of device only if it is recognized as a Mass Storage Device when plugged on the USB port, not if I have to go through WMP to use it.
The article is bloated and two third of it is off topic,...just like the average M$ product.
204 GB of music ( 44,190 tracks ) ! This represent of the order of 4 to 6 months of continuous listening ! I'm pretty sure he never listened to half of it....Just like Microsoft Office, nobody has ever used half of the features
Don't shoot in all directions at the same time. We have not finished with Internet Explorer.
IE is only (painfully) dying, but not dead.
Once the IE threat will have disapeared, it will be time to choose the next target: Word or Windows.
And against Word, OO has still not enough firepower.
With the flaws presented on www.heise.de, I'm discovering that Microsoft has based one security features on the (so far) little know ADS, implemented in NTFS but never used before.
To me this looks like a very bad kludge.
The ADS allow the association of data to files, it's invisible only to the average user, but it's not a secure feature ! (probably a reason why is has not been used for DRM ).
I don't think it won't be long before malware writers will not only irremediably defeat the security feature, but even use it for hiding stuff on their victim's PCs.
A common opinion is that the Windows XP firewall is better the nothing, but it's wrong !
Worse than lack of security, it is to think that the machine is secure when actually it is not. Too many average users will think they are now safe with XP-SP2 and its so called firewall, and they'll never imagine what can still be done with outbound connections and all the information leaking out.
Just install a real firewall and configure it to block everything ( inbound and outbound), except the applications you explicitly authorize to access the internet, and let everything else raise an alarm. Even if your machine is "spyware free", You'll be surprised of all the applications/games trying to call home with no good reason. Enough to get rapidly paranoiac.
Now, Why ? Why does Microsoft deliberately issues in a Security oriented service pack a key component they perfectly know to be deficient ?
In XP, they first issued a limited "firewall", but it was turned off by default ( contrarily to their "everything should be turned on" default rule).
After the disastrous consequences we all witnessed these last months, they now reluctantly issue a new firewall with new rules, but still not blocking these outbound connections, and furthermore it can be silently disabled !
I don't think that Microsoft developers are incompetent and have all flunked "Computer Security 101", it looks like Microsoft does not want to prevent some kind of backdoor or some access to user information....all conspiracy theories are unleashed.
Sad consequence : nothing will be solved by XP-SP2. It will not stop trojan/worms/virus writers, spies, spammers and evil hackers. It will make their life just a bit more difficult.
I'm scared...
on
You've Got PC
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
You'll notice that the configuration does not include any firewall or any anti-virus.... and the targeted customer will be the most vulnerable.
Be prepared for an AOL army of spamming zombies
Slashdot Mirror
The most dismaying is the number of suckers who'll fall in it.
The kids won't play computer games at night.
If, as a customer, I buy some software, I'll stick to it even if it's not perfect and the seller is sure of the corresponding sale. However if I rent it once, find it inadequate or find something better or free, that's the end of the game. And if I use intensively the product, I'll try to buy it ( or even buy a concurrent product if the buying option is not offered), not only because of the direct cost but also for keeping the control of a tool I need for my business.
Actually I can imagine this solution very interesting for rarely used, large, expensive and specialized software that would not be bought otherwise. Typically, because I am a small user of a certain product, I'd be really interested in renting for $200 each time I use (once every two months) this $10000 analysis package that I would never buy otherwise.
If Microsoft does this for Windows or Office, whether for corporate or individual customers, it will rapidly loose its dominant position.
The list of System Requirements says it all.
I'll buy this kind of device only if it is recognized as a Mass Storage Device when plugged on the USB port, not if I have to go through WMP to use it.
The article is bloated and two third of it is off topic, ...just like the average M$ product. ...Just like Microsoft Office, nobody has ever used half of the features
204 GB of music ( 44,190 tracks ) ! This represent of the order of 4 to 6 months of continuous listening ! I'm pretty sure he never listened to half of it.
Don't shoot in all directions at the same time. We have not finished with Internet Explorer. IE is only (painfully) dying, but not dead. Once the IE threat will have disapeared, it will be time to choose the next target: Word or Windows. And against Word, OO has still not enough firepower.
With the flaws presented on www.heise.de, I'm discovering that Microsoft has based one security features on the (so far) little know ADS, implemented in NTFS but never used before. To me this looks like a very bad kludge. The ADS allow the association of data to files, it's invisible only to the average user, but it's not a secure feature ! (probably a reason why is has not been used for DRM ). I don't think it won't be long before malware writers will not only irremediably defeat the security feature, but even use it for hiding stuff on their victim's PCs.
A common opinion is that the Windows XP firewall is better the nothing, but it's wrong ! Worse than lack of security, it is to think that the machine is secure when actually it is not. Too many average users will think they are now safe with XP-SP2 and its so called firewall, and they'll never imagine what can still be done with outbound connections and all the information leaking out. Just install a real firewall and configure it to block everything ( inbound and outbound), except the applications you explicitly authorize to access the internet, and let everything else raise an alarm. Even if your machine is "spyware free", You'll be surprised of all the applications/games trying to call home with no good reason. Enough to get rapidly paranoiac. Now, Why ? Why does Microsoft deliberately issues in a Security oriented service pack a key component they perfectly know to be deficient ? In XP, they first issued a limited "firewall", but it was turned off by default ( contrarily to their "everything should be turned on" default rule). After the disastrous consequences we all witnessed these last months, they now reluctantly issue a new firewall with new rules, but still not blocking these outbound connections, and furthermore it can be silently disabled ! I don't think that Microsoft developers are incompetent and have all flunked "Computer Security 101", it looks like Microsoft does not want to prevent some kind of backdoor or some access to user information. ...all conspiracy theories are unleashed.
Sad consequence : nothing will be solved by XP-SP2. It will not stop trojan/worms/virus writers, spies, spammers and evil hackers. It will make their life just a bit more difficult.
You'll notice that the configuration does not include any firewall or any anti-virus .... and the targeted customer will be the most vulnerable.
Be prepared for an AOL army of spamming zombies
At least the libraries will be able to reuse the jewel cases, we always need some of these.