I'm going to have to stop you there to clear something up - is the Zune capable of running any third party software? Or is it just a typical MP3 player (in which case you can't really count it, unless you want to count the Apple TV, iPod, and so on in the Apple list)
Are you sure it's Twitter? That post is missing the trademark "M$" moniker. In fact, it uses the full company name which I always thought Twitter was physically incapable of typing!
Microsoft do exactly this, and they're even more shady about it. Windows update automatically installs new things on your PC that they deem important you you (malicious software tool, even though I don't want it; WGA even though I don't want it, etc). When MS do WGA I have even seen it wind up on my machine as "Internet Explorer Security Update", "Critical Security Update", etc. Good thing I have a virtual machine that I take a snapshot of before every M$ update now.
I hardly think it's fair for some M$ idiot to complain about that Apple is doing when M$ do exactly the same thing and they try their hardest to hide the fact. Actually, no. The WGA that runs as part of the mentioned security updates is the WGA Validation Tool. This is a run-once-then-throw-away tool. The "Genuine Advantage" (or Disadvantage, depending on your perspective) Notification Tool is the version that installs and stays there - and that's only ever packaged as one thing, Genuine Advantage Notification Tool. The Malicious Software Removal Tool is the same - it runs, then it deletes itself. Not the same at all.
You do realise that iTunes needs a browser component for the store. It uses Quicktime as well and they install it as part of the iTunes install. Does anyone complain about that? Perhaps now that they have a full Safari for Windows that is the easiest way to package the webkit (which I'll hazard a guess is what iTunes has always used) component rather than trying to ship it as part of iTunes? Actually, iTunes doesn't need a browser component at all, and sure as hell doesn't use WebKit (as one other poster in this comments section is trying in vain to get across)
Secondly, iTunes may work with iPod but it doesn't require one so it's hard to say they're leveraging their monopoly using the iPod to get more Apple software installed in Windows. I can think of several reasons to use iTunes over the crap that comes with Windows other than because you have an iPod to sync with. Do explain what these reasons are! I've used iTunes, and hated it with a passion.
The whole article goes on to piss and moan about trusting the source and the updates but at the end of the day it's really rich when M$ are guilty of installing updates that break more than they fix and hiding things they want to roll out under misleading names. Mozilla probably dislike Microsoft far more than you do. It's not "really rich" at all. I've never seen a Firefox update (you know, Mozilla Firefox, Mozilla, the source of the article) try to install other apps. Ever. Sounds like you're using the typical "deflect at Microsoft" tactic to try and cover up the Apple bullshit.
I think what he meant (although far less eloquently than it could have been put) is that you can't really make a statement regarding the ability of various software to open OOXML documents when you have expressed a complete ignorance to all products which are not the ones you use.
And for the record, OpenOffice.org 3 Alpha can natively open, read and save OOXML.
Like any geek, I like the idea of Microsoft being forced into submission, but document format standardization isn't going to be what does it. Maybe when the rest of the office formats are standardized. Um, that's what they're doing! A lot of people respond to anything about OOXML with "Microsoft should just drop it and use ODF", but those arguments always miss the point - that OOXML is actually a standardised version of all of the Office formats. Microsoft can't just drop OOXML and use ODF because they aren't really comparable. ODF is a document format, OOXML is a format designed to cover 5 different types of documents - and people wonder why the spec is bloated.
I do use a laptop, and I don't see #7 at all. One has to wonder what weird stuff he's running. Now, I do have an issue where the laptop cannot enter sleep mode (which wreaks havok on the battery) but I think that might be some of the other software (like Multiplcity).
Actually, VS2008 has been out of beta for... about 3 months now. It debugs perfectly fine too (even as a non-admin, though I assume that you do need to be an admin still to debug programs other than ones you're developing)
I also run Vista on two machines. One with 1GB RAM, one with 1.5GB RAM. Under high loads obviously the machine with 1.5GB is faster, but that's it. All this "you need 4GB to run it" crap is basically bullshit, propogated by the likes of Twitter (who apparently searches Google every couple of days for "Microsoft Vista" just so he can dig up more unsubstantiated crap to post in his "fail log")
Well, certain organisations have always had access to Windows source code (educational institutions, governments) on a "look, but don't touch" basis - after signing massive NDAs. So really, if it were going to happen, it would have happened already (more than once)
As per http://slashdot.org/faq/tags.shtml, the "dupe" tag should never appear in the list - it's internally used by the system to apparently do something with dupe articles (someday it may be set to automatically pull dupes down, I guess)
VS 2005 contains bits and pieces of Office 2003. I only know this because I got an update to Office 2003 over Microsoft Update (not Windows Update), and I only have Office 2000 installed (and VS 2005, of course). The plural of anecdote is not data. I don't have Office 2003 components on my machine, but I do have Visual Studio. Microsoft Update never offers Office 2003 updates to me because I don't have it installed.
The only things I'm aware of that VS 2005 requires for certain things are SQL Server and IIS. It won't, for instance, make an MDF file or a Data Source XSL from a template without a locally running copy of SQL Server (which can be installed alongside VS if you have the Pro package). SQL Express actually, which you can get with every single VS package, including the free Express edition.
It won't allow you to "View In Browser" (on ASPX pages) without IIS, which is installed along with VS 2005 anyway. Incorrect again. IIS is not a requirement, VS will install the ASP.NET development server, which even if you use IIS it will use for previewing/debugging anyway.
I think IE won over Netscape because IE was free. Netscape was not (ever read the Netscape EULA? It required $30 if you wanted to continue to use Netscape after 30 days or something. Like Winzip at the time, it never enforced it).
I have to almost thank IE for doing away with the "Pay Browsers" concept. If it weren't for the problems people had with IE (not configurable enough, horrid to use) we likely would never have had Mozilla. Without Mozilla, no Firefox. Without Firefox, almost all our browsers would still be $30 a piece (yes, I'm aware of browsers like Lynx, but all of these would likely be either niche or single platform like Safari). Nowadays, they're all free - even Opera (unfortunately there still isn't enough competition on Mobile devices to force Opera to make that free too)
Um, yeah. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but this is Slashdot so I'll assume you aren't.
You can't "buy" domains. They never, EVER belong to you. They're all leased to you by a registrar, who leases it from the Registry. Buying them is impossible.
This is correct. They're listed with InterNIC, but they still aren't listed with Verisign GRS, which means they don't have access to the.COM and.NET registries at this time.
This is the list of all companies which Verisign has on record as being allowed to add directly to the.com and.net registries. Gandi is listed (under the name Gandi SARL) as an accredited registrar.
But who's going to give up all that control? Certainly not the MCPs or PHBs. Contrary to popular belief, MCPs aren't brainwashed into being Microsoft-loving hippies who demand absolute Microsoftyness in their networks. As a holder of an MCP, I'll still happily write an application in PHP, Perl, C++, or Pascal if that's what would better fit the requirements - even if I do like developing in.NET more (actually, I prefer Pascal, but all that proves is that I'm crazy).
Mmmhmm, you can now write something like mod_rewrite as an IIS7 module (like before - ISAPI_Rewrite comes to mind) or as a.NET HTTP Module (I've done this before, but in IIS6 it only gets requests that would otherwise make it to the ASP.NET engine - doesn't work like that any more).
I'm actually looking forward to IIS7. So long as it maintains a good security track record, I think it has a better chance with Apache than previous versions did.
It really makes me wonder, why on earth developers don't all switch to the mac? Price is definitely not an excuse anymore, and compatibility issues are tales from ages ago. Blame the price. Noone wants to pay $4000 for a dev box. (Not in the US)
Exchange's native whatever it is has a couple of things which IMAP does not - including such useful functionality as direct push email (the server sends you email as it comes in, no polling the server like with IMAP). And just a note, not everyone can expense stuff to the business - I know I can't.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm going to have to stop you there to clear something up - is the Zune capable of running any third party software? Or is it just a typical MP3 player (in which case you can't really count it, unless you want to count the Apple TV, iPod, and so on in the Apple list)
Are you sure it's Twitter? That post is missing the trademark "M$" moniker. In fact, it uses the full company name which I always thought Twitter was physically incapable of typing!
I hardly think it's fair for some M$ idiot to complain about that Apple is doing when M$ do exactly the same thing and they try their hardest to hide the fact. Actually, no. The WGA that runs as part of the mentioned security updates is the WGA Validation Tool. This is a run-once-then-throw-away tool. The "Genuine Advantage" (or Disadvantage, depending on your perspective) Notification Tool is the version that installs and stays there - and that's only ever packaged as one thing, Genuine Advantage Notification Tool. The Malicious Software Removal Tool is the same - it runs, then it deletes itself. Not the same at all. You do realise that iTunes needs a browser component for the store. It uses Quicktime as well and they install it as part of the iTunes install. Does anyone complain about that? Perhaps now that they have a full Safari for Windows that is the easiest way to package the webkit (which I'll hazard a guess is what iTunes has always used) component rather than trying to ship it as part of iTunes? Actually, iTunes doesn't need a browser component at all, and sure as hell doesn't use WebKit (as one other poster in this comments section is trying in vain to get across) Secondly, iTunes may work with iPod but it doesn't require one so it's hard to say they're leveraging their monopoly using the iPod to get more Apple software installed in Windows. I can think of several reasons to use iTunes over the crap that comes with Windows other than because you have an iPod to sync with. Do explain what these reasons are! I've used iTunes, and hated it with a passion. The whole article goes on to piss and moan about trusting the source and the updates but at the end of the day it's really rich when M$ are guilty of installing updates that break more than they fix and hiding things they want to roll out under misleading names. Mozilla probably dislike Microsoft far more than you do. It's not "really rich" at all. I've never seen a Firefox update (you know, Mozilla Firefox, Mozilla, the source of the article) try to install other apps. Ever. Sounds like you're using the typical "deflect at Microsoft" tactic to try and cover up the Apple bullshit.
No, I don't think it's one of Twitter's. Twitter would have used "M$" - he'd never dream of corrupting his fingertips by typing the Name of the Devil.
It does read a bit like that insane guy that writes Roughly Drafted though.
Your signature is so appropriate to that load of bollocks. Go back to apple.slashdot.org.
I think what he meant (although far less eloquently than it could have been put) is that you can't really make a statement regarding the ability of various software to open OOXML documents when you have expressed a complete ignorance to all products which are not the ones you use.
And for the record, OpenOffice.org 3 Alpha can natively open, read and save OOXML.
I do use a laptop, and I don't see #7 at all. One has to wonder what weird stuff he's running. Now, I do have an issue where the laptop cannot enter sleep mode (which wreaks havok on the battery) but I think that might be some of the other software (like Multiplcity).
Actually, VS2008 has been out of beta for... about 3 months now. It debugs perfectly fine too (even as a non-admin, though I assume that you do need to be an admin still to debug programs other than ones you're developing)
I also run Vista on two machines. One with 1GB RAM, one with 1.5GB RAM. Under high loads obviously the machine with 1.5GB is faster, but that's it. All this "you need 4GB to run it" crap is basically bullshit, propogated by the likes of Twitter (who apparently searches Google every couple of days for "Microsoft Vista" just so he can dig up more unsubstantiated crap to post in his "fail log")
I see you haven't met twitter/erris before.
Well, certain organisations have always had access to Windows source code (educational institutions, governments) on a "look, but don't touch" basis - after signing massive NDAs. So really, if it were going to happen, it would have happened already (more than once)
As per http://slashdot.org/faq/tags.shtml, the "dupe" tag should never appear in the list - it's internally used by the system to apparently do something with dupe articles (someday it may be set to automatically pull dupes down, I guess)
NOD32 does indeed do this. It watches (and terminates infected) HTTP, SMTP/POP3/IMAP, and FTP streams.
This is Slashdot. It really is that hard to tell.
Was that sarcasm? Photoshop has been available on the Mac for years too.
I think IE won over Netscape because IE was free. Netscape was not (ever read the Netscape EULA? It required $30 if you wanted to continue to use Netscape after 30 days or something. Like Winzip at the time, it never enforced it).
I have to almost thank IE for doing away with the "Pay Browsers" concept. If it weren't for the problems people had with IE (not configurable enough, horrid to use) we likely would never have had Mozilla. Without Mozilla, no Firefox. Without Firefox, almost all our browsers would still be $30 a piece (yes, I'm aware of browsers like Lynx, but all of these would likely be either niche or single platform like Safari). Nowadays, they're all free - even Opera (unfortunately there still isn't enough competition on Mobile devices to force Opera to make that free too)
Um, yeah. I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but this is Slashdot so I'll assume you aren't.
You can't "buy" domains. They never, EVER belong to you. They're all leased to you by a registrar, who leases it from the Registry. Buying them is impossible.
This is correct. They're listed with InterNIC, but they still aren't listed with Verisign GRS, which means they don't have access to the .COM and .NET registries at this time.
I'll give you a more conclusive answer:
.com and .net registries. Gandi is listed (under the name Gandi SARL) as an accredited registrar.
http://www.verisign.com/information-services/naming-services/com-net-registry/page_002166.html
This is the list of all companies which Verisign has on record as being allowed to add directly to the
Mmmhmm, you can now write something like mod_rewrite as an IIS7 module (like before - ISAPI_Rewrite comes to mind) or as a .NET HTTP Module (I've done this before, but in IIS6 it only gets requests that would otherwise make it to the ASP.NET engine - doesn't work like that any more).
I'm actually looking forward to IIS7. So long as it maintains a good security track record, I think it has a better chance with Apache than previous versions did.
Exchange's native whatever it is has a couple of things which IMAP does not - including such useful functionality as direct push email (the server sends you email as it comes in, no polling the server like with IMAP). And just a note, not everyone can expense stuff to the business - I know I can't.
I would, but PayPal refuses to allow my country to buy them. They're for the US, Canada, and Australia or something like that only.