Microsoft never hand signed a sheet of paper telling me that I would have my copy of "Longhorn" by the end of 2005 or even 2006.
Why would Microsoft give you a hand signed piece of paper for any operating system release? MS Execs have publically stated that the release would be in 2006.
If Vista is as complicated as its specs say it is, I hope Microsoft takes another two years to get this done
Operating systems are Microsoft's core competency. You would think that by now Microsoft would know how to estimate the scope of the project required to write an upgrade for an existing operating system.
The delays, no matter how well explained, are still delays; and are continuing evidence of Microsoft's incompetence in the area of operating system development.
The corporations will do whatever they can get away with to increase their profits, including pushing so called "net non-neutrality" upon an unsuspecting public. All they need to do is divert lots of money into the Halls of Congress to accomplish thier goals.
I am 100% in favor of helping people learn English. However, that point was not the point of my comment.
In a job where the main task is communicating with customers over the phone, the company needs to assure that the customer service reps can speak understandable English. I live in New York City, I am accustomed to (and enjoy) the various "flavors" of English that are spoken. However, the American Airlines customer service representative was all but incomprehensible.
When hundreds of dollars are involved in a transaction, I want to speak with a person I can understand.
I am reminded of having spent quite a few minutes on the phone with American Airlines customer supprt a few days ago. I had to change the days of my flight, and the aa.com site did not allow me to do that. I had to talk with a person at American Airlines.
Well, the person I talked with could barely speak English. A couple times during the conversation, I had to say, "I did not understand what you just said, but at this point you should be asking me about [some topic]... is that what you just asked me?
I am sure that American Airline is saving a lot of money outsourcing their customer service department to somewhere, but I have to wonder how long it will be before they realize that the road to long-term profitability is travelled by increasing the top-line revenue numbers. You do not increase revenues by convincing customers to go elsewhere due to poor, outsourced service.
Are multifunction gadgets really better? Is the gain in convenience of having many gadgets in one device worth the loss of quality of each of those individual devices comapared to individual items?
Slashbacking to a thread last week... all I really want is a cell phone that works in weak signal areas. I do not want to take pictures, I do not want to listen to MP3s. I do not want to watch videos.
I just want the blasted cell phone to work in weak signal areas.
How can a multifunction device help me? (can I be helped at all?:)
Thanks for the pointer. It does look like it may solve my problem, however I really want this to "just work" without having to know about kernels and firmware and etc. In most other areas Ubuntu is spot on -- very clean, very solid. Wireless still needs some work.
The machine used has an atheros wireless card in it and no other networking. The install preview had me up and connected to the internet through my wireless router without asking me anything.
Did it guess your SSID and access password, or did you have to tell it those items?:)
My home wireless uses WPA2, and I did not know that ubuntu doesn't support that until after I got it installed. WPA2 may have confused the install routines.
I just finished spending about 3 hours on a test install on my IBM Thinkpad notebook.
In a nutshell:
install was flawless. Very clean, very fast. I like the LIve CD initial install, then the icon to do the full install.
apps install were a good selection, not the usual Linux overwhelming "install all apps I can find". Organization of the apps on the menus was nice.
I like the admin capability, instead of having to bounce to root when I want to do something. Much more thought out than Microsoft Vista's harassing UAC.
wireless support was lacking. It saw my Atheros 802.11abg PC Card, but could not do anything with it. I could not connect to my wireless network, even when I cycled security down to 'no security', i.e., it could not connect to a wide open access point.
I tried to send a test page to a network printer (a share on a Windows box) , and the whole notebook hung solid. Power-down required to get it moving again.
So overall, I'd say, "excellent" on the visuals, apps choices, functionality (so long as wireless networking or network printers are not needed).
IMO, desktop users will be happy. Notebook users will be less than happy.
You misread my message. I did not mean to imply that each developer should create his or her own new license, but that each developer has the right to choose what existing license to use.
On the other hand, if a developer wants to create a new license, who are we to say he cannot? I appreciate the concern regarding the proliferation of OSS licenses of late, and I (as a user of and contributor to OSS) agree with you that fewer licenses are better than more licenses. However, we cannot dictate to anyone which license must be used for their original code. If you don't like the license someone chooses to use, then don't use the code that was written under that license. It's really a simple concept.
As a developer, if you value your work, the GPL is the better license under which to release code
Isn't it up to each individual developer to decide what license to use for their original code? Isn't that what choice is all about? If I choose not to use one license or another for my code, why should you care? It is, after all, my code.
The main reason why I have a mobile is so that people can contact me while I'm on the go.
I'd much rather have a simple cell phone with the ability to pick up the signal in poor reception areas and deliver clear sound, than an overly complex, difficult to use mobile digital device that operates marginally as a cell phone.
What google is doing is legal, what Microsoft did was not legal.
The difference is that a company has to act differently when they have a monopoly position in a marketspace. Google does not have a monopoly position, Microsoft does.
Am I the only one who's sitting here and wondering, "What was this guy thinking?!" Laptops have so much custom hardware these days that it's a Bad Idea(TM) to attempt an OS installation from anything but restore CDs.
Last weekend I received a new Dell E1405 Inspiron notebook, I wiped XP from the disk and installed Windows 2000 retail version. It installed and has been running without a problem. Dell even supplies Windows 2000 drivers for the special hardware.
To your point, Vista should not crash and burn as it did, Vista should passively not support the hardware it may not know about.
To my point, Vista has serious problems for a beta 2 version. Very serious problems.
The Chinese dpo no trust Windows unless they have the source code.
Do you really know what Windows is doing? They is this blob of unknown code that is running on 90% of the world's computers, all under the control of one corporation in the US, a corporation that receives special treatment from the US government.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would Microsoft give you a hand signed piece of paper for any operating system release? MS Execs have publically stated that the release would be in 2006.
It's an upgrade to an existing operating system.
If Vista is as complicated as its specs say it is, I hope Microsoft takes another two years to get this done
Operating systems are Microsoft's core competency. You would think that by now Microsoft would know how to estimate the scope of the project required to write an upgrade for an existing operating system.
The delays, no matter how well explained, are still delays; and are continuing evidence of Microsoft's incompetence in the area of operating system development.
I would have mod'd my message as funny.
The Chinese want their encryption to be the standard so that they can use their backdoor.
The US wants its encryption to be the standard so they can use their backdoor.
The corporations will do whatever they can get away with to increase their profits, including pushing so called "net non-neutrality" upon an unsuspecting public. All they need to do is divert lots of money into the Halls of Congress to accomplish thier goals.
In a job where the main task is communicating with customers over the phone, the company needs to assure that the customer service reps can speak understandable English. I live in New York City, I am accustomed to (and enjoy) the various "flavors" of English that are spoken. However, the American Airlines customer service representative was all but incomprehensible.
When hundreds of dollars are involved in a transaction, I want to speak with a person I can understand.
Well, the person I talked with could barely speak English. A couple times during the conversation, I had to say, "I did not understand what you just said, but at this point you should be asking me about [some topic]... is that what you just asked me?
I am sure that American Airline is saving a lot of money outsourcing their customer service department to somewhere, but I have to wonder how long it will be before they realize that the road to long-term profitability is travelled by increasing the top-line revenue numbers. You do not increase revenues by convincing customers to go elsewhere due to poor, outsourced service.
Slashbacking to a thread last week... all I really want is a cell phone that works in weak signal areas. I do not want to take pictures, I do not want to listen to MP3s. I do not want to watch videos.
I just want the blasted cell phone to work in weak signal areas.
How can a multifunction device help me? (can I be helped at all? :)
Has Microsoft changed their way of thinking, or will Windows One Care just be another facet of the continuing Windows problem?
Thanks for the pointer. It does look like it may solve my problem, however I really want this to "just work" without having to know about kernels and firmware and etc. In most other areas Ubuntu is spot on -- very clean, very solid. Wireless still needs some work.
Did it guess your SSID and access password, or did you have to tell it those items? :)
My home wireless uses WPA2, and I did not know that ubuntu doesn't support that until after I got it installed. WPA2 may have confused the install routines.
Thanks for your comment. I've not given up on it yet. I'll try to locate the networkmanager and see how that goes.
Yes, I have used it. Lots of others have have used it are also complaining about this particular feature called UAC.
In a nutshell:
So overall, I'd say, "excellent" on the visuals, apps choices, functionality (so long as wireless networking or network printers are not needed).
IMO, desktop users will be happy. Notebook users will be less than happy.
Does it run Linux? If not, how long before it does?
On the other hand, if a developer wants to create a new license, who are we to say he cannot? I appreciate the concern regarding the proliferation of OSS licenses of late, and I (as a user of and contributor to OSS) agree with you that fewer licenses are better than more licenses. However, we cannot dictate to anyone which license must be used for their original code. If you don't like the license someone chooses to use, then don't use the code that was written under that license. It's really a simple concept.
Isn't it up to each individual developer to decide what license to use for their original code? Isn't that what choice is all about? If I choose not to use one license or another for my code, why should you care? It is, after all, my code.
I'd much rather have a simple cell phone with the ability to pick up the signal in poor reception areas and deliver clear sound, than an overly complex, difficult to use mobile digital device that operates marginally as a cell phone.
The difference is that a company has to act differently when they have a monopoly position in a marketspace. Google does not have a monopoly position, Microsoft does.
Really? What precisely is google doing now that Microsoft was sued for?
Last weekend I received a new Dell E1405 Inspiron notebook, I wiped XP from the disk and installed Windows 2000 retail version. It installed and has been running without a problem. Dell even supplies Windows 2000 drivers for the special hardware.
To your point, Vista should not crash and burn as it did, Vista should passively not support the hardware it may not know about.
To my point, Vista has serious problems for a beta 2 version. Very serious problems.
Note to self: Be sure to proof-read the messages written before the first cup of coffee is consumed.
The Chinese dpo no trust Windows unless they have the source code.
Do you really know what Windows is doing? They is this blob of unknown code that is running on 90% of the world's computers, all under the control of one corporation in the US, a corporation that receives special treatment from the US government.
OMG, don't these people have a life?
Aside from it being a slow news day.