you sir are completely missing the point HP was making and trying to use facts and logic. HP is trying to get some value from WebOS and facts and logic do not help them. It really sounds like Meg and clowns were in a meeting trying to figure out how to get people to run to their open source phone/tablet platform and they figured getting them to run from Google/Android was a good option. The slide showed up asking why would developers and OEMs run from Google/Android and someone said, 'if it were proprietary like when Honeycomb was released'. Along comes this drivel about how Google could take Android inhouse because of Motorola Mobility.
You nailed it though but the truth won't help HP. I see them running to Microsoft again and this time, Meg and Steve will drive them into the dirt like DEC was. IMO
Let me see, netbooks originally shipped with Linux and SSD's. Along came the Windows XP deals and the SSD's were gone and replaced with HD's. Microsoft ports Windows 7 to ARM to go after the tablet market and puts it's phone UI on it. Almost all current tablets use SSD's.... So Windows 8 tablets will be using HD's.
most anyone who bases their profession on only Microsoft software will tote this kind of line. Microsoft targets companies and lets their fans know who are the enemy so you see tutorials like this where the enemy is trashed while Microsoft's software is advanced. Self preservation by those following Microsoft and basing their livelihood on them. Microsoft loves this and designs their partner and developer programs to promote these things.
It is also why these kinds of "bugs" tend to be looked at as intentional by those who've been in the field a while. There's usually nothing to prove it's illegal and only years and years later does illegal activity show up in court docs but usually too late for a case to be filed. IMO
even with the declining market share, there are enough IE users to give BING a nice bump. It's probably time for some nice "independent" research to come out showing how MS BING is gaining market share and this bump will help that study perfectly.
but wasn't this a signature update which included a flag targeting the number one search engine used? Even if it were some automated system which somehow generated a diagnostic which flagged google.com, wouldn't you think Microsoft would run tests on this stuff before shipping it out? I think they have the resources and the money to do this.
they have done this type of thing before and landed in court a few times over it but it cost them little compared to what they gained. As they well know, claiming it's a bug and fixing it at a later date keeps them out of court but does the damage intended or damage benefiting them and harming the competitor.
yes, it could be a mistake or a bug but here's the problem: The company putting the software which controls most of the worlds desktop computers is the same company behind this "bug". Are they really not testing this stuff enough so to let these through? And if not, should they really be your desktop OS vendor?
Because of their history of doing this to their top competitors with lengthy periods due for fixing and releasing patches, I would always lean on the side of this being intentional. Incompetence runs up there in second place.
they took out AOL's TCP/IP stack years ago too and low and behold it happened right around the time Microsoft was getting MSN going. The default action for users clicking their AOL links and finding the dialer stopped working was to use the MSN dialer and bring MSN in. It took a court case to get them fix it and that fix was claimed to take months. It was a bug. Right, because they didn't bother to test against the most used TCP/IP stack out there. Google's a target now so stuff like this is just fun for Microsoft.
given 2 choices in a seach, the standard Rick Santorum site and the "other" site lots of people will find the anti-Santorum site more interesting. Supporters are going to know they want the candidates site but those just surfing for something to read are going to gravitate to the more _colorful_ spreadingsantorum.com. I think it's human nature.l
As it stands, Santorum just has to continue to purchase Google ad space so his candidacy site is top on the results page. Or continue to show why people should not vote for you.
and it has everything to do with the fact that Linux can be scaled down to work well on these battery powered devices while Windows can not. Or at least it hasn't yet been "rebuilt from the ground up" for such a thing. Get real, Apple has shown that you do not need Windows or a Windows interface to be usable. They also have shown that having a small market share has nothing to do with usability since they went from less market share than Linux to the 2nd largest PC reseller and is stomping Microsoft in tablet sales.
If you think that the Linux user base is why Linux is not being used on larger devices you completely missed the whooshing sound of my point about hardware OEMs fearing Microsoft flying over your head.
someone needs to update Wikipedia on this then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS
from that article: "iOS is derived from Mac OS X, with which it shares the Darwin foundation, and is therefore a Unix-like operating system."
Unless I see something otherwise, I would believe that iOS is Darwin based as opposed to the multi-touch tiny screen and GUI is based on the desktop OS X GUI. I've heard that they have moved features from iOS GUI to the desktop so iOS apps could run on the desktop but not the other way around.
I'll keep looking for evidence of iOS being only based on OS X GUI components.
we went to war with Iraq on this kind of "logic". Remember Bush and clowns constantly saying Saddam Hussein was not proving he/they did not have WMD's? What a wonderful world we live in.
it works for software executives too, ie Bill Gates remembering nothing when deposed in both the Sun Microsystems Java case and the Netscape antitrust cases. Other corporate execs forget lots of things about how and what they've done running their corporations and don't get jail time. Heck, Microsoft even fabricated evidence( a video ) and insisted over and over it wasn't fabricated until the opposition saw a slight change in a desktop icon arrangement and proved the timeline was not correct and was fabricated.
There are different rules of law for different classes of citizens or at the very least different interpretations based on class.
they might not be in such a position had they and Microsoft not put artificial limits on what netbooks could be. Both companies limited the screen size, CPU performance and amount of memory which could be shipped in devices of the netbook genre. So now they are declaring a new class of device and setting limits there.
Just goes to show you that there is not an open market in the PC sector and who has been controlling it for so very long. IMO
it says that those saying the iPhone was running the stripped down OS X were either misinformed or very general with the phrase "stripped down". It could very well be using parts of the OS X kernel in the same vain as Android runs a trimmed Linux kernel. In other words, it would be like saying Android runs a stripped down version of a Debian distribution based desktop computer.
What does bug me about all this is that since netbooks showed up years ago, Linux users have been asking for ARM netbooks and laptops without any consideration. Now that Microsoft states they are porting Windows 7 to ARM, there's all this talk about ARM laptops. It just puts more credibility behind the fact that Microsoft has so much control over the hardware makers and goes with that Thaiwanese manufacturing association head who said his members were afraid of Microsoft regarding PC-like devices, including laptops so they were not going to make non-Windows based devices in that form factor.
It's too bad it take giants like Apple and Google to change that but thankfully they are around to do it.
from what I've seen, the deal was worth just over $1 billion so if they are getting $250 million/qtr then that's only a 1 year deal and Nokia is surely going to need more time and money. Windows Phone 7 phones are not selling enough to even beat out RIM and Windows Phone 8, the super phone OS from Microsoft which finally supports more than one CPU core and more memory won't hit the market until well into 2013 or later. As for the Navteq write down being the reason why they lost a billion last qtr, I guess we'll have to wait til the next qtr to see what happens.
I'll keep looking for specifics on how much Microsoft if funneling into Nokia per qtr but the first four articles read state it was only a billion dollar deal and not many billions.
so when have you EVER seen Microsoft scale their OS down so it could be used in small, lightweight battery powered devices? Don't get me wrong, it would be nice for their customers if they have and could do it but there is nothing in their history which would give any warm fuzzy feeling they could pull this off. And they have tried many times with Bill Gates driving the work too.
Don't forget they are also porting it to a different architecture too. So I would not be so free with the word "soon". If you've not noticed, they won't let people even touch the demo devices running Windows 8 ARM being shown around. You probably have at a year to wait if not 2.
with the minimum hardware requirement of 4GB of RAM and a quad-core 1.5GHz a9 CPU. Can't wait to see the size of the battery for this thing unless they go back to 3" B/W displays. The real question is, can Nokia hold out that long? I'd imagine we are talking about another year to a year and a half. Nokia is losing close to $1.5 billion per quarter and the Microsoft deal only provides something like $150 million(yes, that's an "m" and not a "b") annually. Can they really handle losing $6+ billion waiting for this shot at moving the Windows kernel to battery powered ARM devices? I would think even the termites would be leaving the building by the time the OS is solid enough to ship.
ARM does do most of the design work but I think there's still lots of integration and other optimizations done by the licensees. And not all licenses are the same so some are allowed to tweek and others not.
So what does AMD bring to the table with ARM game? They do have a pretty nice graphics GPU and they do have some familiarity with optimizing not to mention the ability to merge x86 with ARM if they want to. ie 2 x86 cores and 2 ARM cores so you could have blazing performance at the cost of power or boot the ARM cores for power sipping usage all in one package. just throwing it out there with off the top of the head comments. Hopefully some chip design geeks chime in with more complete examples of where this could work for AMD and possibly the general customer bases. And hey, maybe that'll mean ARM devices without bootloader lock outs via MS requirements.
Microsoft saw fit to do a press release about their partnership with cloud.com to provide support for Microsofts Hyper-V in OpenStack but when Citrix purchased Cloud.com Microsoft dropped the ball keeping the Hyper-V support going and it was their responsibility.
I wouldn't doubt for a minute though that the reason for the original cloud.com partnership was for a bullet point on a presentation showing either their support for other clouds or how they are working with open source. ie just a marketing point and nothing more.
I find it interesting that Citrix threw this ball into the trash after purchasing Cloud.com since it shows what they think of Microsoft relationships.
just as we spent way too much on manned flights to/from the space station we shouldn't be spending anything on manned flights to the moon yet. We've got a remote control robot on Mars and another on its way so how about putting some on the Moon and start building something? Or atleast share control so universities and science labs can explore what's going on.
and while we're at it, throw in a cage with some stationary robots and some balls to fling at each other? Seriously, we should be doing robotic exploration and building on the moon well before anything else. The next thing you know they'll be funding a golf course up there for retired astronauts and we don't need that.
you're only looking at it for sea level changes when I think the OP was making the point that when there's nothing left to absorb the heat energy, other things start heating up really fast.
if this is true and lots of energy is getting absorbed by the phase change of the melting ice we probably have far less time than we think.
there were many reasons for threading, like it was cheaper to create a thread and use in-process communications between the main process and the threads than it was to fork another process and duplicate the entire process and use other IPC mechanism for comms. But I think that's become less of an expense with modern CPUs. Threading was a mainstay of OS/2 in the early 90s and it resulted in amazing sense of responsiveness on even low end hardware. Windows9x sucked at threading and NT was a dog too but they won and their developers mostly stuck with not using threading. Even much of the NT System apps/utils through XP were not well threaded and I doubt Vista nor Windows 7 are any better.
Besides, HTML 5 specs the "web workers" for threading so if there's a standard being followed there is less of a need to have the JavaScript engine providing the user threading. This now seems like the right move since we've seen browsers going to isolating tabs/pages in their own process so shrinking what's run in those processes would be desirable as long as capabilities(web worksers) remain.
ah, so the "web worker" implementation from HTML5 does a better job for threading in Javascript. got it. If that's what developers find easier and better to use then it makes sense to simplify the threading in their own runtime. Being a published standard helps too so I get it now.
Slashdot Mirror
I forgot, google.com is just another web site. my mistake.
LoB
you sir are completely missing the point HP was making and trying to use facts and logic. HP is trying to get some value from WebOS and facts and logic do not help them. It really sounds like Meg and clowns were in a meeting trying to figure out how to get people to run to their open source phone/tablet platform and they figured getting them to run from Google/Android was a good option. The slide showed up asking why would developers and OEMs run from Google/Android and someone said, 'if it were proprietary like when Honeycomb was released'. Along comes this drivel about how Google could take Android inhouse because of Motorola Mobility.
You nailed it though but the truth won't help HP. I see them running to Microsoft again and this time, Meg and Steve will drive them into the dirt like DEC was. IMO
LoB
Let me see, netbooks originally shipped with Linux and SSD's. Along came the Windows XP deals and the SSD's were gone and replaced with HD's. Microsoft ports Windows 7 to ARM to go after the tablet market and puts it's phone UI on it. Almost all current tablets use SSD's.... So Windows 8 tablets will be using HD's.
got it. lol
LoB
most anyone who bases their profession on only Microsoft software will tote this kind of line. Microsoft targets companies and lets their fans know who are the enemy so you see tutorials like this where the enemy is trashed while Microsoft's software is advanced. Self preservation by those following Microsoft and basing their livelihood on them. Microsoft loves this and designs their partner and developer programs to promote these things.
It is also why these kinds of "bugs" tend to be looked at as intentional by those who've been in the field a while. There's usually nothing to prove it's illegal and only years and years later does illegal activity show up in court docs but usually too late for a case to be filed. IMO
LoB
even with the declining market share, there are enough IE users to give BING a nice bump. It's probably time for some nice "independent" research to come out showing how MS BING is gaining market share and this bump will help that study perfectly.
LoB
but wasn't this a signature update which included a flag targeting the number one search engine used? Even if it were some automated system which somehow generated a diagnostic which flagged google.com, wouldn't you think Microsoft would run tests on this stuff before shipping it out? I think they have the resources and the money to do this.
they have done this type of thing before and landed in court a few times over it but it cost them little compared to what they gained. As they well know, claiming it's a bug and fixing it at a later date keeps them out of court but does the damage intended or damage benefiting them and harming the competitor.
yes, it could be a mistake or a bug but here's the problem: The company putting the software which controls most of the worlds desktop computers is the same company behind this "bug". Are they really not testing this stuff enough so to let these through? And if not, should they really be your desktop OS vendor?
Because of their history of doing this to their top competitors with lengthy periods due for fixing and releasing patches, I would always lean on the side of this being intentional. Incompetence runs up there in second place.
LoB
they took out AOL's TCP/IP stack years ago too and low and behold it happened right around the time Microsoft was getting MSN going. The default action for users clicking their AOL links and finding the dialer stopped working was to use the MSN dialer and bring MSN in. It took a court case to get them fix it and that fix was claimed to take months. It was a bug. Right, because they didn't bother to test against the most used TCP/IP stack out there. Google's a target now so stuff like this is just fun for Microsoft.
LoB
given 2 choices in a seach, the standard Rick Santorum site and the "other" site lots of people will find the anti-Santorum site more interesting. Supporters are going to know they want the candidates site but those just surfing for something to read are going to gravitate to the more _colorful_ spreadingsantorum.com. I think it's human nature.l
As it stands, Santorum just has to continue to purchase Google ad space so his candidacy site is top on the results page. Or continue to show why people should not vote for you.
LoB
just like how most people don't want BSD? right.
LoB
"Pour"? Is english a 2nd language or what? So anyways, it's more like poor consumers than poor Microsoft.
LoB
and it has everything to do with the fact that Linux can be scaled down to work well on these battery powered devices while Windows can not. Or at least it hasn't yet been "rebuilt from the ground up" for such a thing. Get real, Apple has shown that you do not need Windows or a Windows interface to be usable. They also have shown that having a small market share has nothing to do with usability since they went from less market share than Linux to the 2nd largest PC reseller and is stomping Microsoft in tablet sales.
If you think that the Linux user base is why Linux is not being used on larger devices you completely missed the whooshing sound of my point about hardware OEMs fearing Microsoft flying over your head.
LoB
someone needs to update Wikipedia on this then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS
from that article: "iOS is derived from Mac OS X, with which it shares the Darwin foundation, and is therefore a Unix-like operating system."
Unless I see something otherwise, I would believe that iOS is Darwin based as opposed to the multi-touch tiny screen and GUI is based on the desktop OS X GUI. I've heard that they have moved features from iOS GUI to the desktop so iOS apps could run on the desktop but not the other way around.
I'll keep looking for evidence of iOS being only based on OS X GUI components.
LoB
we went to war with Iraq on this kind of "logic". Remember Bush and clowns constantly saying Saddam Hussein was not proving he/they did not have WMD's? What a wonderful world we live in.
LoB
it works for software executives too, ie Bill Gates remembering nothing when deposed in both the Sun Microsystems Java case and the Netscape antitrust cases. Other corporate execs forget lots of things about how and what they've done running their corporations and don't get jail time. Heck, Microsoft even fabricated evidence( a video ) and insisted over and over it wasn't fabricated until the opposition saw a slight change in a desktop icon arrangement and proved the timeline was not correct and was fabricated.
There are different rules of law for different classes of citizens or at the very least different interpretations based on class.
LoB
they might not be in such a position had they and Microsoft not put artificial limits on what netbooks could be. Both companies limited the screen size, CPU performance and amount of memory which could be shipped in devices of the netbook genre. So now they are declaring a new class of device and setting limits there.
Just goes to show you that there is not an open market in the PC sector and who has been controlling it for so very long. IMO
LoB
it says that those saying the iPhone was running the stripped down OS X were either misinformed or very general with the phrase "stripped down". It could very well be using parts of the OS X kernel in the same vain as Android runs a trimmed Linux kernel. In other words, it would be like saying Android runs a stripped down version of a Debian distribution based desktop computer.
What does bug me about all this is that since netbooks showed up years ago, Linux users have been asking for ARM netbooks and laptops without any consideration. Now that Microsoft states they are porting Windows 7 to ARM, there's all this talk about ARM laptops. It just puts more credibility behind the fact that Microsoft has so much control over the hardware makers and goes with that Thaiwanese manufacturing association head who said his members were afraid of Microsoft regarding PC-like devices, including laptops so they were not going to make non-Windows based devices in that form factor.
It's too bad it take giants like Apple and Google to change that but thankfully they are around to do it.
LoB
from what I've seen, the deal was worth just over $1 billion so if they are getting $250 million /qtr then that's only a 1 year deal and Nokia is surely going to need more time and money. Windows Phone 7 phones are not selling enough to even beat out RIM and Windows Phone 8, the super phone OS from Microsoft which finally supports more than one CPU core and more memory won't hit the market until well into 2013 or later. As for the Navteq write down being the reason why they lost a billion last qtr, I guess we'll have to wait til the next qtr to see what happens.
I'll keep looking for specifics on how much Microsoft if funneling into Nokia per qtr but the first four articles read state it was only a billion dollar deal and not many billions.
LoB
so when have you EVER seen Microsoft scale their OS down so it could be used in small, lightweight battery powered devices? Don't get me wrong, it would be nice for their customers if they have and could do it but there is nothing in their history which would give any warm fuzzy feeling they could pull this off. And they have tried many times with Bill Gates driving the work too.
Don't forget they are also porting it to a different architecture too. So I would not be so free with the word "soon". If you've not noticed, they won't let people even touch the demo devices running Windows 8 ARM being shown around. You probably have at a year to wait if not 2.
LoB
with the minimum hardware requirement of 4GB of RAM and a quad-core 1.5GHz a9 CPU. Can't wait to see the size of the battery for this thing unless they go back to 3" B/W displays. The real question is, can Nokia hold out that long? I'd imagine we are talking about another year to a year and a half. Nokia is losing close to $1.5 billion per quarter and the Microsoft deal only provides something like $150 million(yes, that's an "m" and not a "b") annually. Can they really handle losing $6+ billion waiting for this shot at moving the Windows kernel to battery powered ARM devices? I would think even the termites would be leaving the building by the time the OS is solid enough to ship.
LoB
ARM does do most of the design work but I think there's still lots of integration and other optimizations done by the licensees. And not all licenses are the same so some are allowed to tweek and others not.
So what does AMD bring to the table with ARM game? They do have a pretty nice graphics GPU and they do have some familiarity with optimizing not to mention the ability to merge x86 with ARM if they want to. ie 2 x86 cores and 2 ARM cores so you could have blazing performance at the cost of power or boot the ARM cores for power sipping usage all in one package. just throwing it out there with off the top of the head comments. Hopefully some chip design geeks chime in with more complete examples of where this could work for AMD and possibly the general customer bases. And hey, maybe that'll mean ARM devices without bootloader lock outs via MS requirements.
LoB
Microsoft saw fit to do a press release about their partnership with cloud.com to provide support for Microsofts Hyper-V in OpenStack but when Citrix purchased Cloud.com Microsoft dropped the ball keeping the Hyper-V support going and it was their responsibility.
here's Microsoft's press release:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2010/oct10/10-22openstackpr.mspx
I wouldn't doubt for a minute though that the reason for the original cloud.com partnership was for a bullet point on a presentation showing either their support for other clouds or how they are working with open source. ie just a marketing point and nothing more.
I find it interesting that Citrix threw this ball into the trash after purchasing Cloud.com since it shows what they think of Microsoft relationships.
LoB
just as we spent way too much on manned flights to/from the space station we shouldn't be spending anything on manned flights to the moon yet. We've got a remote control robot on Mars and another on its way so how about putting some on the Moon and start building something? Or atleast share control so universities and science labs can explore what's going on.
and while we're at it, throw in a cage with some stationary robots and some balls to fling at each other? Seriously, we should be doing robotic exploration and building on the moon well before anything else. The next thing you know they'll be funding a golf course up there for retired astronauts and we don't need that.
LoB
you're only looking at it for sea level changes when I think the OP was making the point that when there's nothing left to absorb the heat energy, other things start heating up really fast.
if this is true and lots of energy is getting absorbed by the phase change of the melting ice we probably have far less time than we think.
LoB
there were many reasons for threading, like it was cheaper to create a thread and use in-process communications between the main process and the threads than it was to fork another process and duplicate the entire process and use other IPC mechanism for comms. But I think that's become less of an expense with modern CPUs. Threading was a mainstay of OS/2 in the early 90s and it resulted in amazing sense of responsiveness on even low end hardware. Windows9x sucked at threading and NT was a dog too but they won and their developers mostly stuck with not using threading. Even much of the NT System apps/utils through XP were not well threaded and I doubt Vista nor Windows 7 are any better.
Besides, HTML 5 specs the "web workers" for threading so if there's a standard being followed there is less of a need to have the JavaScript engine providing the user threading. This now seems like the right move since we've seen browsers going to isolating tabs/pages in their own process so shrinking what's run in those processes would be desirable as long as capabilities(web worksers) remain.
LoB
ah, so the "web worker" implementation from HTML5 does a better job for threading in Javascript. got it. If that's what developers find easier and better to use then it makes sense to simplify the threading in their own runtime. Being a published standard helps too so I get it now.
LoB