You've never had to hunt down that blasted Windows Installer 3.1 Redistributable, have you?
And I bet YOU'VE never had to hunt down the Windows Update 6 Redistributable. I'm sure it's on Windows Update, but... well, you can see the quandary here, right? In reality, it's impossible to find without Google.
It has incomplete (barely there) support for all the weirdness that goes into ACID3, but the XHTML and CSS2.1 support is very good now. I design for IE8 and completely ignore IE7, and I find that my pages work just fine in Firefox and Safari without a single modification now.
Uh, based on this Slashdot comment I get the feeling they built it themselves from scratch. None of the mainstream FOSS servers would be implemented so badly that they'd give you the entire HTML page in the response to a HEAD request. Not even IIS is dumb enough to do that.
Except that there's nothing wrong with IIS and.NET.
Office Accounting, however...
Although elsewhere in this discussion someone pointed out a much more likely option - that Microsoft uses Great Plains for Payroll, considering they bought the company.
Actually, I highly doubt Microsoft is using that - there's a point at which even the developer of a product knows that their product is woefully unsuitable for themselves, and I think Microsoft even knows that Office Accounting really isn't "up to the job" of handling Microsoft itself.
They're probably using something arcane like SAP or Oracle Financials.
Actually, the middle two are frequently said as they're written (SCOTUS and VoIP). But I've never heard the first one (I assume it's just the President?) and anyone who says "Sequel" for the fourth one sounds like an idiot.
No, iTunes wouldn't. Apple has a very rigid cost structure. They claim they had to give ground when they moved to DRM free, so now there are three price points, but none of those points is $2.99.
Bandwidth costs money. And quite a lot too (well, the cost of setting up the pipes costs a lot - past there the bandwidth isn't too expensive provided you use a lot of it).
Internap and GlobalCrossing aren't going to give you a GigE link to the internet for free. And once you've got that, they aren't going to let your traffic traverse their link for free.
Also, "unlimited bandwidth" doesn't exist. You're right on one thing - we need more honest sellers. If we had those, "unlimited" providers wouldn't exist.
The music (according to the summary even!) is streamed from a server. So unless you're on a wireless network, you wont be able to listen to it on a touch.
Think of it as mandatory activation for the music.
Except for a few niggling problems - one of which is that there is actually an explicit contractual agreement for OEM products (it's called the System Builder Agreement). If you don't agree to it, you aren't even allowed to buy the product. And if you do agree to it, you're meant to require it further down the chain too.
Unless, of course, the only way in which you are allowed to sell Vista as an OEM is if you stop selling XP. Then it's an antitrust violation from Microsoft.
No it's not. It's Microsoft refusing to sell more copies of their own product, which is perfectly legal. The OEM is still more than capable of selling what stock they have. That's like saying that Nintendo discontinuing the Nintendo64 because the Wii came out is an antitrust violation.
Ah, yeah that sounds about right. Sometimes I wonder why administration is even allowed to make IT decisions. That's the sort of thing that resulted in us standardising on IE6 on Windows XP SP2 (no SP3 here!) with CA eTrust 8 for antivirus (and no protection at all on servers!).
I use it almost solely at home. I find its standards compliance has vastly improved as well, as now when I write something with IE8 in mind, Firefox renders it identically (and IE7 makes it look like ass - case in point CSS backgrounds on input buttons, and the display:table properties).
Now if they could fix the pesky instability that frequently pisses me off - I'm getting sick of restarting the browser (I expected a release candidate to be a bit more stable).
So, to use a car analogy, I guess something like speed enforcement would be a thing of the past with an amendment like that. They can't limit my "right" to operate my possession as I see fit, so I can happily drive however fast I want. I know car stuff is regulated by the individual states, but they have to abide by the Constitution too, don't they?
Those amendments specifically refer to "congress", in which case no they don't apply to the states. It's pretty simple. Besides, the constitution delineates what congress can do, not what it can't. And any right not delineated to congress is reserved by the states.
Slashdot Mirror
You've never had to hunt down that blasted Windows Installer 3.1 Redistributable, have you?
And I bet YOU'VE never had to hunt down the Windows Update 6 Redistributable. I'm sure it's on Windows Update, but ... well, you can see the quandary here, right? In reality, it's impossible to find without Google.
It'll be a cold day in hell before Microsoft distributes Iceweasel under the GPL, and provides the source themselves.
Not actually true. ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/developr/Interix/interix22/
Pay attention to the copy of "GPL.TXT" and the huge fucking hulking 100MB of GPLed source code. On a Microsoft FTP server.
So it'll encourage Microsoft to release IE8 then?
Oh wait...
IE8 - what number should I call to let you know?
It has incomplete (barely there) support for all the weirdness that goes into ACID3, but the XHTML and CSS2.1 support is very good now. I design for IE8 and completely ignore IE7, and I find that my pages work just fine in Firefox and Safari without a single modification now.
Uh, based on this Slashdot comment I get the feeling they built it themselves from scratch. None of the mainstream FOSS servers would be implemented so badly that they'd give you the entire HTML page in the response to a HEAD request. Not even IIS is dumb enough to do that.
We don't use that word widely in the major variants of UK English either.
Except that there's nothing wrong with IIS and .NET.
Office Accounting, however...
Although elsewhere in this discussion someone pointed out a much more likely option - that Microsoft uses Great Plains for Payroll, considering they bought the company.
No it wasn't. That was misconfigured Akamai caches not passing on what the origin server identified itself as.
Actually, I highly doubt Microsoft is using that - there's a point at which even the developer of a product knows that their product is woefully unsuitable for themselves, and I think Microsoft even knows that Office Accounting really isn't "up to the job" of handling Microsoft itself.
They're probably using something arcane like SAP or Oracle Financials.
No, they're allowing browsers that embed WebKit. Firefox would still not be allowed.
Actually, the middle two are frequently said as they're written (SCOTUS and VoIP). But I've never heard the first one (I assume it's just the President?) and anyone who says "Sequel" for the fourth one sounds like an idiot.
No, iTunes wouldn't. Apple has a very rigid cost structure. They claim they had to give ground when they moved to DRM free, so now there are three price points, but none of those points is $2.99.
Mod parent fucking idiotic.
Bandwidth costs money. And quite a lot too (well, the cost of setting up the pipes costs a lot - past there the bandwidth isn't too expensive provided you use a lot of it).
Internap and GlobalCrossing aren't going to give you a GigE link to the internet for free. And once you've got that, they aren't going to let your traffic traverse their link for free.
Also, "unlimited bandwidth" doesn't exist. You're right on one thing - we need more honest sellers. If we had those, "unlimited" providers wouldn't exist.
The music (according to the summary even!) is streamed from a server. So unless you're on a wireless network, you wont be able to listen to it on a touch.
Think of it as mandatory activation for the music.
Pretty much DRM then?
I don't get it. What the hell does that have to do with anything?
And so's this for all we know. How about you shut up until you've seen it? Really now!
No it doesn't. Monopoly or not, you are still entitled to discontinue your own products.
Except for a few niggling problems - one of which is that there is actually an explicit contractual agreement for OEM products (it's called the System Builder Agreement). If you don't agree to it, you aren't even allowed to buy the product. And if you do agree to it, you're meant to require it further down the chain too.
Unless, of course, the only way in which you are allowed to sell Vista as an OEM is if you stop selling XP. Then it's an antitrust violation from Microsoft.
No it's not. It's Microsoft refusing to sell more copies of their own product, which is perfectly legal. The OEM is still more than capable of selling what stock they have. That's like saying that Nintendo discontinuing the Nintendo64 because the Wii came out is an antitrust violation.
Ah, yeah that sounds about right. Sometimes I wonder why administration is even allowed to make IT decisions. That's the sort of thing that resulted in us standardising on IE6 on Windows XP SP2 (no SP3 here!) with CA eTrust 8 for antivirus (and no protection at all on servers!).
I use it almost solely at home. I find its standards compliance has vastly improved as well, as now when I write something with IE8 in mind, Firefox renders it identically (and IE7 makes it look like ass - case in point CSS backgrounds on input buttons, and the display:table properties).
Now if they could fix the pesky instability that frequently pisses me off - I'm getting sick of restarting the browser (I expected a release candidate to be a bit more stable).
So, to use a car analogy, I guess something like speed enforcement would be a thing of the past with an amendment like that. They can't limit my "right" to operate my possession as I see fit, so I can happily drive however fast I want. I know car stuff is regulated by the individual states, but they have to abide by the Constitution too, don't they?
Those amendments specifically refer to "congress", in which case no they don't apply to the states. It's pretty simple. Besides, the constitution delineates what congress can do, not what it can't. And any right not delineated to congress is reserved by the states.
And I'm not even an American. Terrible.
That's been debunked oh so many times. Please never reference it again.
Look up what a "googol" is. In fact, Google can look it up for you.
GP misspelled it.
More bullshit. Microsoft doesn't sign DLLs for third party applications (not for WFP, at any rate - that's reserved for Windows itself).