Hell, my retail copy of Vista Home Ultimate still makes me run into something where Microsoft deliberately crippled it so that I'd buy the more expensive version -- so, it is less capable for networking, and the built in back up manager lets me have exactly one scheduled backup set. There's no reason for this, other than Microsoft trying to carve up the market and get as much money from me as they can -- especially since all that was in there, but they took the time to cripple it.
You mean how Apple charges for the Server versions based on the number of users served? Microsoft does segmenting because their product is the OS. Apple doesn't because their real money is on hardware margins, the OS is just icing on cake. Not to mention XCode 4 is not not free, when it used to be, and Apple charging or trying to charge 30% of not just apps but even 3rd party subscriptions like Netflix and ebooks on Kinel on iOS and you can see the Apple is much more greedier. There is no reason to ban Sony and other third party ebook readers from the App store except to grab as much money from the users and publishers.
>The ISVs were bullied plenty by Microsoft. The past 10 years haven't been as bad because MS was under the microscope.
Name more than a handful of ISVs that were bullied by MS apart from the few standard ones referenced like DR-DOS and DRVSPACE. Compare that number to the number of companies that hit it big (and still do) by being ISVs. And name other companies that have been friendlier to partners regarding backwards compatibility etc.
>Yeah, MICROSOFT did that. No one else, no other reason, but MICROSOFT. Thank you, MICROSOFT, for without you computing would have been impossible.
High on snark and strawman arguments, low on content. How about acknowledging that Microsoft's model of being only a software platform helped competition in hardware and drive down costs, for example AMD wouldn't exist now, as Apple has only 1 CPU supplier.
I think that without MS there would be more competition and more diversity.
How about elaborating how the computing nirvana you envision would've come about instead of silly handwaving?
No, that's just you getting a FOSS hatefest rolling
Pointing out that FOSS is not a panacea for companies is hatefest trolling?
Like HP, Acer, Dell, Sony, Asus, HTC and tens of thousands of ISV's ? Not to mention that it was Microsoft which forced the prices of computers down(leading to the x86 takeover of the server environment on which Linux thrives) due to licensing to multiple OEMs so they became affordable to the general public and the rest of the world. If you think Apple's prices are high now, imagine what they would be if there was minimal competition.
Nokia's situation is in a major because not being able to implement Meego/Maemo(Linux, if it needs reminding) properly inspite of throwing a thousand devs and billions into it and the products were all Open Source. How is that Microsoft's fault? If anything, it shows the dangers of the fallacies of expecting FOSS to be a magic cure-all without proper UI and architectural design etc. According to the wisdom on Slashdot,, A team of ninja developers descend by magic on any FOSS project and then make it the best, surpassing all the other offerings.
I thought the discussion might be around the lessons of why they failed, but it didn't take a few minutes before the regulars descend into a 'M$' hating circle jerk.
Oops,sorry, didn't mean to step into the selective memoried Slashdot bitchfest.
So you mean it was just hate of Microsoft and group think when Microsoft was attacked for malware on Windows in at least half a million comments on here by Linux and Mac enthusiasts?
The thing to keep in mind is that this malware going around is a trojan. The user has to enter a username and password to install the malware.
It can't propagate itself nor install itself automatically from a web site.
People are just blindly typing their password to anything asking. Interestingly, it claims to be an antivirus suite and uses SEO to show up on searches for Mac antiviruses per Arstechnica (http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/05/fake-mac-defender-antivirus-app-scams-users-for-money-cc-numbers.ars), so ironically, the people getting infected are people who think they need virus protection on a Mac.
Expect to hear people continuing to proclaim this as the beginning of Mac viruses, however.
I believe that the vast majority of malware targetting Windows also uses social engineering and not exploits. Things like ASLR, sandboxing etc. have made it hard for real exploits so instead the blackhats have gone for things like fake codecs, fake smiley packs and fake antivirus applications. Even granting your point, usually Safari is one of the first to fall in contests like pwn2own which use drive-by exploits and not social engineering.
You are the one that needs compare apples to apples, we are not talking about Apps here, but purchases made through apps, for which Apple has zero overhead. MS may charge you for the apps in their mobile store, but they're not charging you for the purchases made through those apps. See the difference?
Why on Earth would Apple leave a blindingly large loophole in the system that allowed you to sell services which funnel through Apple and as such require Apple to support them (which costs money)
How does it cost Apple money if purchases are made through the App? iFlow does not use IAP, thus they don't 'funnel through' Apple.
Amazon does run afoul of Apple's rules which are supposed to be enforced from June 30th. Right now they're getting a break because iOS customers would be pissed to see Kindle disappear from their phones. Lets see what happens in July.
Slashdot Mirror
Did we see the same video? They fucking demoed the old UI in place. Geez, there are a gazillion posts saying the same thing as you here.
>When Android was 7 months old, it was 7 months old from *GROUND UP*
Isn't Android based on Linux and other OSS software? Doesn't really seem GROUND UP.
There is a world of difference between WP7 and WM6.5. Read up, you will be surprised.
Spoken like a typical ignorant Slashdot dumbass who knows nothing except to accusing people of being M$ shills and apologists.
>If someone figures out a way to bypass Installer and run unsigned code without at least throwing a warning, then I'll worry ..
All it takes is one Flash, PDF or Java exploit. And God knows those are plenty.
That would probably happen on Windows too if Microsoft is allowed to bundle MSE into the OS over 'OMGZ ANTITRUST" shouts.
Hell, my retail copy of Vista Home Ultimate still makes me run into something where Microsoft deliberately crippled it so that I'd buy the more expensive version -- so, it is less capable for networking, and the built in back up manager lets me have exactly one scheduled backup set. There's no reason for this, other than Microsoft trying to carve up the market and get as much money from me as they can -- especially since all that was in there, but they took the time to cripple it.
You mean how Apple charges for the Server versions based on the number of users served? Microsoft does segmenting because their product is the OS. Apple doesn't because their real money is on hardware margins, the OS is just icing on cake. Not to mention XCode 4 is not not free, when it used to be, and Apple charging or trying to charge 30% of not just apps but even 3rd party subscriptions like Netflix and ebooks on Kinel on iOS and you can see the Apple is much more greedier. There is no reason to ban Sony and other third party ebook readers from the App store except to grab as much money from the users and publishers.
>The ISVs were bullied plenty by Microsoft. The past 10 years haven't been as bad because MS was under the microscope.
Name more than a handful of ISVs that were bullied by MS apart from the few standard ones referenced like DR-DOS and DRVSPACE. Compare that number to the number of companies that hit it big (and still do) by being ISVs. And name other companies that have been friendlier to partners regarding backwards compatibility etc.
>Yeah, MICROSOFT did that. No one else, no other reason, but MICROSOFT. Thank you, MICROSOFT, for without you computing would have been impossible.
High on snark and strawman arguments, low on content. How about acknowledging that Microsoft's model of being only a software platform helped competition in hardware and drive down costs, for example AMD wouldn't exist now, as Apple has only 1 CPU supplier.
I think that without MS there would be more competition and more diversity.
How about elaborating how the computing nirvana you envision would've come about instead of silly handwaving?
No, that's just you getting a FOSS hatefest rolling
Pointing out that FOSS is not a panacea for companies is hatefest trolling?
Are you talking about WP7 or WM ? I am having a hard time imagining WP7 to be much worse than Symbian.
You partner with Microsoft, you pay the price.
It's been that way for decades.
Like HP, Acer, Dell, Sony, Asus, HTC and tens of thousands of ISV's ? Not to mention that it was Microsoft which forced the prices of computers down(leading to the x86 takeover of the server environment on which Linux thrives) due to licensing to multiple OEMs so they became affordable to the general public and the rest of the world. If you think Apple's prices are high now, imagine what they would be if there was minimal competition.
Nokia's situation is in a major because not being able to implement Meego/Maemo(Linux, if it needs reminding) properly inspite of throwing a thousand devs and billions into it and the products were all Open Source. How is that Microsoft's fault? If anything, it shows the dangers of the fallacies of expecting FOSS to be a magic cure-all without proper UI and architectural design etc. According to the wisdom on Slashdot,, A team of ninja developers descend by magic on any FOSS project and then make it the best, surpassing all the other offerings.
I thought the discussion might be around the lessons of why they failed, but it didn't take a few minutes before the regulars descend into a 'M$' hating circle jerk.
Oops,sorry, didn't mean to step into the selective memoried Slashdot bitchfest.
On the LAN side Windows can still be pwned as easily as before, you basically have instant shell access to any networked Windows machines.
[citation needed], even if it is with the default firewall turned off, for Vista and Windows 7.
So you mean it was just hate of Microsoft and group think when Microsoft was attacked for malware on Windows in at least half a million comments on here by Linux and Mac enthusiasts?
The thing to keep in mind is that this malware going around is a trojan. The user has to enter a username and password to install the malware.
It can't propagate itself nor install itself automatically from a web site.
People are just blindly typing their password to anything asking. Interestingly, it claims to be an antivirus suite and uses SEO to show up on searches for Mac antiviruses per Arstechnica (http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/05/fake-mac-defender-antivirus-app-scams-users-for-money-cc-numbers.ars), so ironically, the people getting infected are people who think they need virus protection on a Mac.
Expect to hear people continuing to proclaim this as the beginning of Mac viruses, however.
I believe that the vast majority of malware targetting Windows also uses social engineering and not exploits. Things like ASLR, sandboxing etc. have made it hard for real exploits so instead the blackhats have gone for things like fake codecs, fake smiley packs and fake antivirus applications. Even granting your point, usually Safari is one of the first to fall in contests like pwn2own which use drive-by exploits and not social engineering.
http://www.cultofmac.com/amazons-kindle-app-has-unti-june-30th-to-support-new-in-app-purchase-rules/82176
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20110215/june-30-deadline-for-apple-subscriptions/
Netflix is in the same boat, and no, they can't really afford to lose both of those, thats why they keep approving the updates. http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/15/apple-kindle-netflix-in-app/
I know that that rule is in effect now, I was asking for a reference to the "never" part.
Nice blind iFan reply. Kinde could be going away too. http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/15/apple-kindle-netflix-in-app/
You are the one that needs compare apples to apples, we are not talking about Apps here, but purchases made through apps, for which Apple has zero overhead. MS may charge you for the apps in their mobile store, but they're not charging you for the purchases made through those apps. See the difference?
What a dumbass iFanboy reply, how is Apple's offering any better than theirs? It's about killing competition, not about improving things
They have a June 30 deadline to comply. http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/15/apple-kindle-netflix-in-app/
>You were never able to have your OWN in-app purchasing system.
Reference? I don't think that's true, even if Amazon chose not go that route.
Grownups? Maybe you mean the megacorps can cut deals while the poor indie devs are left out?
Why would Amazon complain publicly?
> Perhaps, just perhaps, Amazon itself thinks the rules don't bother them
How do you infer that?
Why on Earth would Apple leave a blindingly large loophole in the system that allowed you to sell services which funnel through Apple and as such require Apple to support them (which costs money)
How does it cost Apple money if purchases are made through the App? iFlow does not use IAP, thus they don't 'funnel through' Apple.
That is not possible under the new rules. Kindle is getting favorable treatment right now but they have to follow the new rules from June 30.
Your parent and GP posts are talking about Microsoft Windows, not Windows Phone. Get it?
There's no use raising prices. Apple will demand 30% of the new price and so will the publishers.
Amazon does run afoul of Apple's rules which are supposed to be enforced from June 30th. Right now they're getting a break because iOS customers would be pissed to see Kindle disappear from their phones. Lets see what happens in July.