If you really want privacy regulation, start attaching the online privacy of selected government officials.
Remeber the Thomas hearings? Someone went and dug up his old video store rental records. *Very* shortly after that, it became a crime to release/publish video store records.
How long do you think it would take to get some reasonable privacy regulation if the community started posting the personal e-mail accounts, surfing habits (via some DoubleClick info, perhaps?), and online purchasing history of every member of Congress? And their family?
It's not AOL who's preventing Microsoft from interopolating with AIM users.
You show me one thing that AOL did that was solely anti-competitive, and served nothing but preventing better online services from competing in the market.
I'd argue that locking out the MS client, while not preventing other clients to access the AIM userbase, is anticompetitive.
Force them to release detailed, accurate, timely, advance specs to Office file formats
Bingo! But that's just a start. They need to:
Release specs to all file formats
BTW, you can get the specs for the Word file format now, but you're only supposed to use it to help support your Office installation,
not create competing products that read/write Word format (wink, wink).
Release specs to all system interfaces
I thought it was a great idea when MS integrated an HTML viewer into the OS -- when I first heard about it, my head swam with the possibilities. Sadly, they've never taken advantage of it (and no, telling me how many files are in a folder doesn't count).
It'd be nice if I could have the (currently few) advantages of an integrated browser without using IE -- a custom build of Mozilla would be great if it ever gets released.
Allow unlimited customization of the system by OEMs
This one looks like it's coming based on what I've heard of the findings of fact. OEMs should be free to customize
any part of Windows -- after all, they've paid for it. I'd love it if my next Dell ditched Notepad for a useful quickie editor, had an integrated Mozilla, a different startup screen (I don't care which one, just something new), and was generally tweaked up. Of course, I'd like to have the original Windows components stashed on a CD somewhere, but OEMs should be able to treat Windows as a collection of components to be changed out at will. If they (the OEMs) end up making bad choices, the market will let them know.
Microsoft has convinced themselves and other that anti-competitive practices is really competition. You notice that both Compuserve and Prodigy no longer exist.
This had very little to do with MS.
Compu$erve ran on a very old custom envrionment (VAX clusters) that they couldn't effectively patch up to the Internet. They still had those %#^ numeric addresses -- do you really want to be 77245.3073@compuserve.cis.com?
I think the straw that might have broken their back was that Win95-friendly package the put out right before the 'net hit the consumer market. Can't remember the name right now, but it was a total pile of junk, and CI$ dropped support for it about six months after it came out (shortly after MS had been forced to put it on their desktop as part of the settlement that let them keep the MSN signup in their distro). Shortly after that program failed was when the "Compu$erve for sale" rumours started showing up.
Note that AOL now owns Compu$erve.
Prodigy is a different story -- you can read about one reason for their demise here. I, for one, don't miss 'em.
Also, note that AOL has competition that is vying to replace AOL's market dominance. Yet even with that we see nothing from AOL indicating that they are using their market domenince to keep others out.
Really? Then how come I can't use my MSN Messenger to talk to my AOL IM buddies?
I'm not saying that MS is a paragon of virtue -- but holding AOL up as a respectable model is just ludicrous. I was going to add additional/. articles dealing with AOL here, but there were so many that you might as well just pick some out yourself.
You haven't seen many VB programmers worried about the Y2K bug, have you? That's because MS simply distributed a patched runtime library, and most VB programs were instantly fixed.
Ha! I note you say most, but I just wrapped up a contract to rewrite a VB3 program in VB6. Why? The VB3 program used Jet 2.0 for data storage, and MS won't certify Access/Jet 2.0 as being Y2K compliant.
Funny thing is, the program does no date calculations at all! Still, it was a nice chunk of change...
I can think of several ways to generate an executable from VB:
Actually compile the original code, and toss in or link to a run-time library.
This is what they do -- actually compile the original code down to a Win32 PE. The end result includes some stub code that links in the executable to the runtime library. They've been doing this since VB5.
Benchmarks indicate that in some areas, the performance is in the same range as VC++. Most VB programs spend their time in the GUI, accessing a database, or making Win32 API calls, so they don't see much of an improvement anyway over P-Code (which is still an option).
Natively compiled or P-Code compiled (compacted?), the same runtime must be shipped with every VB program. Not a problem when you're writing a database app (as I'd wager most of these "business apps" mentioned in the article are), but when your 50K utility requires you to ship a 1.3 MB runtime, it's a real pain. It's also why the market for the ActiveX controls I write is pretty much limited to the VB world -- they've already got to ship the runtime, so it's not as big of an issue for them.
Eliminating the runtime dependency by having VB statically link in selected portions of the runtime (I don't need a minimum 1.3 MB executable, thank you) has been a long-standing request of a portion of the VB crowd. Unfortunately, MS is still all fired up to make VB a web site development tool, and the preview of VB7 (probably an alpha build) showed only how to create HTML pages in VB. Gack.
watching lesbian sex is not as bad as Jonny watching last action hero
Actually, watching "The Last Action Hero" is okay. Don't you remember when Bob Dole came out during the '96 decrying Hollywood Violence(TM) and popped off with a large list of offenders? Rather conspicuously absent was Mr. Schwarzenegger, suggested by many to be off the list because of his large contributions to the GOP.
the customer service systems we routinely have viruses that get past the virus scanners because they bring in disks at such a horrendous rate with stupid screesavers and crap on them.
Dig out a copy of the Resource Kit (95/98/NT, it doesn't matter), and review the material on system policies. There are a lot of things you can do to lock down these systems and save yourself hassle. While you're at it, go into the BIOS (you've password-protected BIOS access, right?) and turn off the floppy. You should be able to really tick off your users.:-)
Of course, your best solution is to pull the PCs altogether and get some nice 3270 or VT100 terminals. Linux will do in the short run, but if it becomes a popular desktop environment, you'll run into the same problems. Yes, you can lock down a Linux box, but if you're not willing to do it for Win[95/98/NT], then why should we expect you'll do it for Linux?
Re:Good, but too derivative of Mars
on
Antarctica
·
· Score: 1
Did I mention the Mars based science fiction novel I'm writing. In the future, Mars is such a desolate, unpleasant place, it's populated like Australia was, with criminals. Hence the name "Mars Bars"
Did *I* mention the dystopian sci-fi novel I'm writing, where a gender-related disease (a la Frank Herbert's The White Plague) forces everyone to live on nearby planets, except when they visit Earth to reproduce?
It's called "Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus".
I find it sad that reporters would pick up these stories from the web, then run with them in full gear without corroborating their stories.
Exactly. I saw the article on the mainstream site at about the same time it appeared here on/., and there was some question as to whether or not it was real.
Going to WHOIS showed the domain registered to "Satan's Minions". Pretty obviously a joke.
Shame on these so-called "reporters" who can't even be bothered to do the most basic fact-checking.
Take a simple example using IE on a Windows box. Say you want to set your default HTML editor to Notepad. You can't.
Umm, I hate to be a downer, but, yes, you can. With IE5 it's easy enough to do from the Internet Options dialog. Older versions may require a bit of tweaking to the registry.
ObAntiMSComplaint: That $%^@# IE5 GPFs on me at least once a day...
How much spin-off crime(ie: Break & Entering, Mugging, Murder and Petty Theft) can you attibute to Drugs? Doesn't matter if drugs are legal or not!
Please.
How many incidents of "spin-off" crime can you attribute to alcohol? Cigarettes? It makes a big difference if they're legal.
The criminal mind will do something criminal in order to get enough cash for his/her fix.
We're *all* criminals. When was the last time you broke the law? I'll confess -- I was speeding on the way back home this morning. Legalization, taxation, and support for those with genuine problems is a much more humane (and realistic) solution than trying to lock up everyone you can get your hands on. The laws are unfair (witness the Cocaine/Crack sentencing disparities), selectively enforced, and are turning our country into a police state.
Wanna know what's really screwing up this country? The (failed) War on Drugs.
Slashdot Mirror
start attaching the online privacy
Uh, make that attacking
Remeber the Thomas hearings
Remember, as in "Remember to spell-check those posts!"
Remeber the Thomas hearings? Someone went and dug up his old video store rental records. *Very* shortly after that, it became a crime to release/publish video store records.
How long do you think it would take to get some reasonable privacy regulation if the community started posting the personal e-mail accounts, surfing habits (via some DoubleClick info, perhaps?), and online purchasing history of every member of Congress? And their family?
It's not AOL who's preventing Microsoft from interopolating with AIM users.
You show me one thing that AOL did that was solely anti-competitive, and served nothing but preventing better online services from competing in the market.
I'd argue that locking out the MS client, while not preventing other clients to access the AIM userbase, is anticompetitive.
Bingo! But that's just a start. They need to:
It'd be nice if I could have the (currently few) advantages of an integrated browser without using IE -- a custom build of Mozilla would be great if it ever gets released.
This had very little to do with MS.
Compu$erve ran on a very old custom envrionment (VAX clusters) that they couldn't effectively patch up to the Internet. They still had those %#^ numeric addresses -- do you really want to be 77245.3073@compuserve.cis.com?
I think the straw that might have broken their back was that Win95-friendly package the put out right before the 'net hit the consumer market. Can't remember the name right now, but it was a total pile of junk, and CI$ dropped support for it about six months after it came out (shortly after MS had been forced to put it on their desktop as part of the settlement that let them keep the MSN signup in their distro). Shortly after that program failed was when the "Compu$erve for sale" rumours started showing up.
Note that AOL now owns Compu$erve.
Prodigy is a different story -- you can read about one reason for their demise here. I, for one, don't miss 'em.
Also, note that AOL has competition that is vying to replace AOL's market dominance. Yet even with that we see nothing from AOL indicating that they are using their market domenince to keep others out.
Really? Then how come I can't use my MSN Messenger to talk to my AOL IM buddies?
I'm not saying that MS is a paragon of virtue -- but holding AOL up as a respectable model is just ludicrous. I was going to add additional /. articles dealing with AOL here, but there were so many that you might as well just pick some out yourself.
Ha! I note you say most, but I just wrapped up a contract to rewrite a VB3 program in VB6. Why? The VB3 program used Jet 2.0 for data storage, and MS won't certify Access/Jet 2.0 as being Y2K compliant.
Funny thing is, the program does no date calculations at all! Still, it was a nice chunk of change...
Actually compile the original code, and toss in or link to a run-time library.
This is what they do -- actually compile the original code down to a Win32 PE. The end result includes some stub code that links in the executable to the runtime library. They've been doing this since VB5.
Benchmarks indicate that in some areas, the performance is in the same range as VC++. Most VB programs spend their time in the GUI, accessing a database, or making Win32 API calls, so they don't see much of an improvement anyway over P-Code (which is still an option).
Natively compiled or P-Code compiled (compacted?), the same runtime must be shipped with every VB program. Not a problem when you're writing a database app (as I'd wager most of these "business apps" mentioned in the article are), but when your 50K utility requires you to ship a 1.3 MB runtime, it's a real pain. It's also why the market for the ActiveX controls I write is pretty much limited to the VB world -- they've already got to ship the runtime, so it's not as big of an issue for them.
Eliminating the runtime dependency by having VB statically link in selected portions of the runtime (I don't need a minimum 1.3 MB executable, thank you) has been a long-standing request of a portion of the VB crowd. Unfortunately, MS is still all fired up to make VB a web site development tool, and the preview of VB7 (probably an alpha build) showed only how to create HTML pages in VB. Gack.
Actually, watching "The Last Action Hero" is okay. Don't you remember when Bob Dole came out during the '96 decrying Hollywood Violence(TM) and popped off with a large list of offenders? Rather conspicuously absent was Mr. Schwarzenegger, suggested by many to be off the list because of his large contributions to the GOP.
Dig out a copy of the Resource Kit (95/98/NT, it doesn't matter), and review the material on system policies. There are a lot of things you can do to lock down these systems and save yourself hassle. While you're at it, go into the BIOS (you've password-protected BIOS access, right?) and turn off the floppy. You should be able to really tick off your users. :-)
Of course, your best solution is to pull the PCs altogether and get some nice 3270 or VT100 terminals. Linux will do in the short run, but if it becomes a popular desktop environment, you'll run into the same problems. Yes, you can lock down a Linux box, but if you're not willing to do it for Win[95/98/NT], then why should we expect you'll do it for Linux?
Did *I* mention the dystopian sci-fi novel I'm writing, where a gender-related disease (a la Frank Herbert's The White Plague) forces everyone to live on nearby planets, except when they visit Earth to reproduce?
It's called "Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus".
D'oh!
Exactly. I saw the article on the mainstream site at about the same time it appeared here on /., and there was some question as to whether or not it was real.
Going to WHOIS showed the domain registered to "Satan's Minions". Pretty obviously a joke.
Shame on these so-called "reporters" who can't even be bothered to do the most basic fact-checking.
Umm, I hate to be a downer, but, yes, you can. With IE5 it's easy enough to do from the Internet Options dialog. Older versions may require a bit of tweaking to the registry.
ObAntiMSComplaint: That $%^@# IE5 GPFs on me at least once a day...
Please.
How many incidents of "spin-off" crime can you attribute to alcohol? Cigarettes? It makes a big difference if they're legal.
The criminal mind will do something criminal in order to get enough cash for his/her fix.
We're *all* criminals. When was the last time you broke the law? I'll confess -- I was speeding on the way back home this morning. Legalization, taxation, and support for those with genuine problems is a much more humane (and realistic) solution than trying to lock up everyone you can get your hands on. The laws are unfair (witness the Cocaine/Crack sentencing disparities), selectively enforced, and are turning our country into a police state.
Wanna know what's really screwing up this country? The (failed) War on Drugs.
Stang