What exactly does that command do? (Sorry, I'm not a VMS junkie.:)
As far as seeing the code... you could always become a certified MS partner and take a look via shared source.
Please, enlighten me, what's wrong with the Windows security model?
It's largely based on VMS, and uses Access Control Lists to secure many types of system resources, and it's got an excellent LDAP-based directory system for managing resources across machines and organizations (Active Directory), as well as the ability to delegate control over these resources on a fine grained level. It's got a great single-sign on domain model that allows users to access resource across not just machines, but entire companies, all while maintaining this delegation.
In fact, the Windows security model is, in most ways, more advanced and better thought out than the traditional Unix security model. There have been many independant projects to integrate some of the standard Windows security features (or VMS features, if you prefer) into Unix and Linux, especially ACL support.
I can think of a few things that I would change if I could (the ability to apply security descriptors to Windows Messages, for instance, or the fact that Microsoft hasn't *enforced* the policy of having applications run without admin privs), but the model itself is very solid.
What hasn't been solid in the past is the *implementation* of the model. Because it's the most attacked OS on the planet, people find lots of bugs and exploit them. Some might also say that Microsoft's code quality is below average, although I don't agree with that because I've never seen any solid evidence of it.
The xbox team is lucky MS didn't go ahead with their desire to kill off the project after the first couple of years when it became clear that Sony was leaving them in the dust in sales.
Got anything to back up these claims? I never heard MS wanted to kill Xbox like this. I'm pretty sure they understood it would be an uphill battle.
Rushing such underpowered hardware out the door ahead of Sony and Nintendo is the life and death gamble the xbox team is having to make now that the amount of money they have to spend is significantly smaller than with the first xbox design.
Underpowred? Hardly.. The Xbox 360 is quite equally matched against what Sony has annouced for the PS3, not the mention the fact it will be out MONTHS ahead of Sony's system. If Microsoft learned anything from the Xbox its that its extremely difficult to dethrone a system that has been on the market for a few months.
As far as the size, most people just don't care. The only complaint I had against the first Xbox was that you couldn't stack anything on top of it. That was annoying.
MS's revenue growth has been on a straight line decline over the past five years, along with the stock price.
Really? That's funny, because this pretty graph says otherwise. Microsoft has split their stock over the past few years, which was responsible for one large drop. And of course there was the anti-trust case. Aside from that there has been a fairly steady upward creep for the past few years.
As far as revenue growth, try our friend google before you make completely unfounded statements in an attempt to make a point.
I wouldn't be surprised if the 360 never actually makes it to store shelves in November. And I would say it is even money on the thing getting canceled in the next year or two.
Well, based on the fact that this conclusion appears to be based on complete figments of your imagination, I hope you don't mind if take it with a grain of salt.
It's very unlikely that the accessories for a system will significantly change the sales of that system. With the exception of some fairly serious add-ons (like the Powerglove, Robie, etc), most accessories are just "nice to haves".
If the Xbox 360 does well then companies will flock to MS and gladly pay the license fee. MS makes lots of money off this program, and most of the companies who would have made accessories to begin with will continue to do so because it will still result in a profit.
If the Xbox 360 does poorly, then there wouldn't have been very many 3rd party accessories to begin with.
The only people who lose out in this scenario is small accessories companies who might not be able to afford the cut into their profits, and potentially consumers if these license fees are large enough to cause the accesories to be priced significantly higher.
This appears to be the same thing as Microsoft's shared source program.
Interestingly, the article posting didn't contain any snide remarks or skeptical prejudgements... both of which almost certainly would have been included if this had been about Microsoft.
It can't be seen only because it turns off when you lift the mouse and when the hole in the bottom of the mouse isn't covered. (Pretty smart.)
If you're really sneaky (like with glass) you can see a faint light coming from the emitter.
My point is that I find it kind of funny that there is so much hype over a mouse that if it were made by any other company it wouldn't have even made a ripple in the web waters.
What, are you running a marathon with it? Perhaps you have small hands, but the mouse is designed to perfectly fit into the palm of the average persons hand and give your hand a comfortable place to rest while using it.
Awkward to grip, causes the mouse to often orient at a slight angle.
Again, this must be due to some hand deformity.
The buttons on the side are useless, requiring far too much of a contortion to get to work.
In a resting position, my thumb sits directly below the forward/back buttons. Because of their shape I can simply angle my thumb slightly upwards (or inwards, I guess) and it presses the appropriate button.
Using the task button does require a little bit more movement of my thumb. I have to bend it a bit and "aim" for the task button... but it's not all that common to use that button anyway. (I do use it, however, as the voice comm button for Counter Strike, and that works well.)
Scroll wheel is nice, scroll buttons suck.
Care to be a bit more specific? I find myself using the download scroll button quite often. I set it to basically be a page down so I can quickly scroll through documents. Works great. I don't use the scroll up button very often, however.
left and right click require different ammounts of force to initiate, very disconcerting for the first few days.
Your mouse must be busted, man. My left/right buttons require the exact same amount of pressure, as far as I can tell.
I don't want funky contours, I want a symetrical mouse.
So you would rather have a mouse that in no way matches the contours of your hand and instead more closely mimics the contours of a squished twinkie.
It uses a real laser (as opposed to a red LED and a camera) for tracking, has an ergonomic design, is wireless, has a recharging stand, battery indicator, 8 buttons (left, right, forward, back, "tasks", scroll up, scroll down), and a up/down/left/right tilt wheel.
I use this thing for everything from Photoshop to Counter Strike, and it is BY FAR the best mouse I've ever used, corded or not. Never jumps around. Is incredibly accurate. Extremely comfortable. Battery lasts a very long time. It's just great.
Can somebody tell me why I would want the Apple mouse? Oh... ya... because Apple made it. My bad.
So, this is a "just" or noble thing to do? Interesting.
What about if a scientist had instead "discovered" that there was an asteriod hurtling torward our pale blue dot? What if that scientist, much like this one, hadn't yet confirmed that the asteriod would hit us, but it was going to be close. And what if there was absolutely nothing we could do about it either way?
That same hacker discovers this information and leaks it to the media. Knowing the media they would scare the crap out of basically everybody with a TV, radio, or newspaper. It might even cause widespread panic.
Now lets suppose that during that panic lots of people are hurt, and some die.
Was it still a justified action on the part of the hacker?
I think, regardless of the outcome of the asteriod flight, it was not. If the asteriod hit us and millions died, the few that were killed died before they would have otherwise. If the asteriod missed us, they likely died far before they would have otherwise.
Because this hacker decided he knew better than the scientist and took matters into his own hands, people died.
An arbitary example, perhaps... but apparently so is the opinion of many of those people on this forum saying that what the hacker did was "good".
"I've got a licensed, genuine version of Windows, but F them for making me jump through hoops to receive continued support. I paid for this and I shouldn't have to keep wasting my time to soothe their paranoid brows."
Paranoid: Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others. (Source)
"In 2002, piracy cost the worldwide software industry $13billion in lost revenue." - (Source)
Dispute the BSA's data if you want (I'm sure it's suspect), but I would hardly call Microsoft paranoid for thinking that a large number of people pirate Windows and that they are likely losing a lot of money to it.
Is a 5 second automated check of your OS really a high price to pay for software updates?
The only people who should be pissed at this are those who stole Windows, and we should all be pissed at them for being thieves.
Slashdot Mirror
None of those animals were ever native to North America. Ever.
Which statements?
They've said almost nothing about the console, and certainly nothing offical.
Are you kidding me? This is essentially and ordinary mouse. It kinda has two buttons and a scroll nipple. That's it.
Yet people are going nuts over it. Do you honest think if Logitech released this same mouse it would have had the same reaction? Give me a break.
Articles about the MX1000 were deserved because it was a significant step forward for mice.
If you don't see the difference you've obviously been drinking the spiked kool aid.
What exactly does that command do? (Sorry, I'm not a VMS junkie. :)
As far as seeing the code... you could always become a certified MS partner and take a look via shared source.
rethink of the security model in Windows
Please, enlighten me, what's wrong with the Windows security model?
It's largely based on VMS, and uses Access Control Lists to secure many types of system resources, and it's got an excellent LDAP-based directory system for managing resources across machines and organizations (Active Directory), as well as the ability to delegate control over these resources on a fine grained level. It's got a great single-sign on domain model that allows users to access resource across not just machines, but entire companies, all while maintaining this delegation.
In fact, the Windows security model is, in most ways, more advanced and better thought out than the traditional Unix security model. There have been many independant projects to integrate some of the standard Windows security features (or VMS features, if you prefer) into Unix and Linux, especially ACL support.
I can think of a few things that I would change if I could (the ability to apply security descriptors to Windows Messages, for instance, or the fact that Microsoft hasn't *enforced* the policy of having applications run without admin privs), but the model itself is very solid.
What hasn't been solid in the past is the *implementation* of the model. Because it's the most attacked OS on the planet, people find lots of bugs and exploit them. Some might also say that Microsoft's code quality is below average, although I don't agree with that because I've never seen any solid evidence of it.
At any rate, please... elaborate.
Got anything to back up these claims? I never heard MS wanted to kill Xbox like this. I'm pretty sure they understood it would be an uphill battle.
Underpowred? Hardly.. The Xbox 360 is quite equally matched against what Sony has annouced for the PS3, not the mention the fact it will be out MONTHS ahead of Sony's system. If Microsoft learned anything from the Xbox its that its extremely difficult to dethrone a system that has been on the market for a few months.
As far as the size, most people just don't care. The only complaint I had against the first Xbox was that you couldn't stack anything on top of it. That was annoying.
Really? That's funny, because this pretty graph says otherwise. Microsoft has split their stock over the past few years, which was responsible for one large drop. And of course there was the anti-trust case. Aside from that there has been a fairly steady upward creep for the past few years.
As far as revenue growth, try our friend google before you make completely unfounded statements in an attempt to make a point.
Well, based on the fact that this conclusion appears to be based on complete figments of your imagination, I hope you don't mind if take it with a grain of salt.
As far as MS is concerned, it's a win-win.
It's very unlikely that the accessories for a system will significantly change the sales of that system. With the exception of some fairly serious add-ons (like the Powerglove, Robie, etc), most accessories are just "nice to haves".
If the Xbox 360 does well then companies will flock to MS and gladly pay the license fee. MS makes lots of money off this program, and most of the companies who would have made accessories to begin with will continue to do so because it will still result in a profit.
If the Xbox 360 does poorly, then there wouldn't have been very many 3rd party accessories to begin with.
The only people who lose out in this scenario is small accessories companies who might not be able to afford the cut into their profits, and potentially consumers if these license fees are large enough to cause the accesories to be priced significantly higher.
This appears to be the same thing as Microsoft's shared source program.
Interestingly, the article posting didn't contain any snide remarks or skeptical prejudgements... both of which almost certainly would have been included if this had been about Microsoft.
Take 5 minutes and compare Google Maps (MSN Maps, or whatever) to Streets and Trips. Not even close. Not by a mile. Nor will they ever be.
It can't be seen only because it turns off when you lift the mouse and when the hole in the bottom of the mouse isn't covered. (Pretty smart.) If you're really sneaky (like with glass) you can see a faint light coming from the emitter.
My point is that I find it kind of funny that there is so much hype over a mouse that if it were made by any other company it wouldn't have even made a ripple in the web waters.
Big and bulky
What, are you running a marathon with it? Perhaps you have small hands, but the mouse is designed to perfectly fit into the palm of the average persons hand and give your hand a comfortable place to rest while using it.
Awkward to grip, causes the mouse to often orient at a slight angle.
Again, this must be due to some hand deformity.
The buttons on the side are useless, requiring far too much of a contortion to get to work.
In a resting position, my thumb sits directly below the forward/back buttons. Because of their shape I can simply angle my thumb slightly upwards (or inwards, I guess) and it presses the appropriate button.
Using the task button does require a little bit more movement of my thumb. I have to bend it a bit and "aim" for the task button... but it's not all that common to use that button anyway. (I do use it, however, as the voice comm button for Counter Strike, and that works well.)
Scroll wheel is nice, scroll buttons suck.
Care to be a bit more specific? I find myself using the download scroll button quite often. I set it to basically be a page down so I can quickly scroll through documents. Works great. I don't use the scroll up button very often, however.
left and right click require different ammounts of force to initiate, very disconcerting for the first few days.
Your mouse must be busted, man. My left/right buttons require the exact same amount of pressure, as far as I can tell.
I don't want funky contours, I want a symetrical mouse.
So you would rather have a mouse that in no way matches the contours of your hand and instead more closely mimics the contours of a squished twinkie.
For $41 I can get the Logitech MX1000 laser mouse.
It uses a real laser (as opposed to a red LED and a camera) for tracking, has an ergonomic design, is wireless, has a recharging stand, battery indicator, 8 buttons (left, right, forward, back, "tasks", scroll up, scroll down), and a up/down/left/right tilt wheel.
I use this thing for everything from Photoshop to Counter Strike, and it is BY FAR the best mouse I've ever used, corded or not. Never jumps around. Is incredibly accurate. Extremely comfortable. Battery lasts a very long time. It's just great.
Can somebody tell me why I would want the Apple mouse? Oh... ya... because Apple made it. My bad.
So, this is a "just" or noble thing to do? Interesting.
What about if a scientist had instead "discovered" that there was an asteriod hurtling torward our pale blue dot? What if that scientist, much like this one, hadn't yet confirmed that the asteriod would hit us, but it was going to be close. And what if there was absolutely nothing we could do about it either way?
That same hacker discovers this information and leaks it to the media. Knowing the media they would scare the crap out of basically everybody with a TV, radio, or newspaper. It might even cause widespread panic.
Now lets suppose that during that panic lots of people are hurt, and some die.
Was it still a justified action on the part of the hacker?
I think, regardless of the outcome of the asteriod flight, it was not. If the asteriod hit us and millions died, the few that were killed died before they would have otherwise. If the asteriod missed us, they likely died far before they would have otherwise.
Because this hacker decided he knew better than the scientist and took matters into his own hands, people died.
An arbitary example, perhaps... but apparently so is the opinion of many of those people on this forum saying that what the hacker did was "good".
Paranoid: Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others. (Source)
"In 2002, piracy cost the worldwide software industry $13billion in lost revenue." - (Source)
Dispute the BSA's data if you want (I'm sure it's suspect), but I would hardly call Microsoft paranoid for thinking that a large number of people pirate Windows and that they are likely losing a lot of money to it.
Is a 5 second automated check of your OS really a high price to pay for software updates?
The only people who should be pissed at this are those who stole Windows, and we should all be pissed at them for being thieves.