I had thought I'd read something about the military hospitals using HL7 and digital records for many years back when Microsoft called Windows Vista. There's some software called Vista that's used in military hospitals or something like that and the military hospitals have been using electronic records for a long time. No surprise TFA was more of a PR stunt since it seems that's what lots of "news" is these days, paid advertising.
I've seen responses from the Kronos group and it appears this is indeed a Microsoft FUD stunt with issues brought up having been remedied months ago or other actions taking place to mitigate the issues. As expected, Microsoft is starting their FUD campaign and using the same old way of doing it.
correct, they _could_ be right but since they are well known for spreading FUD about competitors their warning flares look like clown faces in the sky. I would much rather see anyone else make statements about this than them. Especially since they are promoting some other direct interface to graphics drivers by the browser.
if WebGL is really this flawed then it will fail on its own.
if it really is that bad then it will fail on its own as more and more attack vectors get listed. Adding security after the fact is not likely to help with compatibility and constantly breaking compatibility while creating a new standard is a tough road.
I'm surprised such large corporate backers would be pushing such flawed software too.
and hopefully they've designed in ways to mitigate security issues.
If WebGL and OpenCL are as holy as some are saying then some large companies are completely missing the security boat. It still seems like this should be something Microsoft takes up with those groups supporting WebGL instead of public releases stating 'it may do this' or someone 'might do that', etc. This makes their statements a marketing ploy no matter if it's true or not.
if it is as bad as Microsoft says then it will fail on its own.
we've already seen there are many options for passenger/private vehicles and most of those are not effective for heavy equipment(diesels). Yet here is all this talk about trying to convert 100% of all vehicles on the road to biofuels. Bullshit to that I say. The world is not black or white and people should get a clue that those posting how impossible it is to convert 100% of the vehicles to X, Y, or Z technology are either protectionists, ludites, or something else other than knowledgeable. IMO
so this "independent research" has also been done on Microsoft's browser integration to the graphics card also? I think we're on the same page on that but this bit about Microsoft calling out WebGL as trouble is 100% marketing FUD and a business method well used by them. If they called out why their own implementation was the correct one that would be one thing but there is no mention of Microsoft's own bypass of the OS and giving the browser direct access to the graphics card.
Are Apple/BSD, UNIX and GNU/Linux doing the same thing or do they have to do the same to get some much needed performance boost? Maybe we're going back to the days of DOS where the application had their own hardware drivers.
yup, they were successful in curtailing OpenGL support and eventually got DirectX to a point where it could be used. It took years and billions of dollars but they were successful. that has nothing to do with what's going on with WebGL or are you saying that in 10 years Microsoft's solution will be usable?
or like Java, C++, OpenGL, etc. I can't wait for the day Microsoft, instead of putting out FUD, they put out press releases stating their existing software is better than the up and coming stuff because of X, Y, and Z. That would mean a "new" kind of company and actual competition.
Did you notice MSRC report targets the drivers when Microsoft is responsible for providing the driver interfaces to the kernel and approving the drivers? Don't forget, Microsoft is building direct video interfaces into their browser too and I didn't see a word mentioned about that. Seems like we're going backwards these days. Facebook is looking more and more like AOL and Windows is looking more and more like DOS by bringing the hardware closer to the application. They are saying the design of Windows is insufficient to provide proper abstraction and performance it would seem.
did they bring this up to the WebGL Working Group or is this a PR piece to spread FUD about something they don't control and want gone? It may or may not be a valid point but they don't get to have their cake and eat it too. So instead of Microsoft working with the WebGL WG at Kronos and providing security APIs to the driver vendors to help secure the platform, they spread FUD about how things might be insecure. And doesn't Microsoft have to "approve" drivers so wouldn't it be their responsibility to prevent poor drivers from enabling security circumvention at the OS level?
This looks like 100% pure MS FUD and it's not surprising since Microsoft's business methods do not promote cross platform API's because of the threat of reducing the importance of the Windows platform in the market.
I remember VRML and remember SIGGraph when all the world was buzzing about 3D on the web. Lots of cool tech and it's about time.
probably because they have a history of not doing well with security. Microsoft always goes out of their way 'calling the kettle black' when they don't want people using something they don't control so its no wonder people here mock them and point the finger back to them. Have you asked yourself why Microsoft would make such a public statement about WebGL? what is their position on OpenGL and cross platform 3D and why is that? Is Microsoft even part of the WebGL Working Group? Maybe Microsoft should be the ones STFU.
they created ActiveX in response to Java applets and the threat that someone else's API's could become dominant. This is normal business for Microsoft and just like how they created Direct3D to counter the spreading OpenGL API's in the 90s, WebGL is probably too much of a platform threat to support so they'll do the typical FUD thing and say it sucks, it's bad and it's dangerous while they're working on their own replacement which will solve world hunger according to their press releases and up until it actually ships with about 50% of what WebGL had when they started.
They must do everything they know how to keep profits rolling and 3D is finally catching on so it's back to their form of business. FUD before crud.
they are trying to drive up Windows based PC sales. They have been flat and Microsoft needs ways to help pay for purchasing Skype. They might also have pulled code off of the XBox, which is multi-core, and the code probably required a 2nd core to shovel some processing off to and they didn't want to rework it for single core systems.
the reporting is as if the stories were outsourced and 10 year olds were asked to read the reports. Not only that, I've seen stock footage shown as representing what was happening instead of footage of the actual event. I find that more and more people are just watching "the news" for the weather or traffic and not the reports. And what is up with local news showing stories of what happened in Timbucktoo when it has no effect or relationship to local events, news, or even culture?
FCC, it's not the internet which is killing local news, they have been killing themselves over the past couple of decades.
no, that doesn't work again patent trolls who will have not products which your "vast patent portfolio" can be leveraged again. And if you don't think Microsoft fought this vigorously, they took it all the way to the Supreme Court. So this is not going to convince big companies they need more patents. That is being done by Microsoft, Apple, and Oracle now by going after Android using vendors and promotes the concept of mutual assured destruction in the patent field much like how the cold war concept caused the nuclear weapon build up.
In the current climate of Apple, Microsoft, Oracle and others trying to shut down Android, we will not likely see those vendors joining in on a workable patent reform bill because that would end their war on Android. Nothing will change because of this i4i case and nothing meaningful will get passed to stop these things considering the lobby dollars these vendors wield. IMO
we're already seeing Microsoft using their old vfat patent to hammer the use of Linux and in some cases, they are asking for licensing fees which are about equal to what they themselves charge for the whole OS. I think Barnes & Noble are the only ones fighting this and we've seen HTC is paying $5/dev. So I doubt we'll see Microsoft 'learning' from this and changing their ways or even joining a fight to change the patent laws if that means they lose the ability to hound Linux vendors for money for MS claimed IP.
I still get laugh out of the name of the company, i4i( eye for eye as in 'an eye for an eye' ), considering they went after Microsoft.
mush mouth #2, I don't need to show you no stinking MBA to know that this was a dumb move by Nvidia. But you obviously don't know enough to discuss the pros/cons of this and seem to think it's an anit-Microsoft issue and not about Nvidia. Where's the conspiracy theory spin? You forgot that one.
hey mush mouth, so YOU were there and know that they weighed what an open ended clause like that would mean and know that Microsoft would have dropped Nvidia if they wanted an closing to that clause? Well excuse me for not being in the room when that happened.
and one more thing mush mouth, there's no conspiracy here except the one YOU are making up and this is not an anti-MS topic other than the dumb response of this sub-thread OP.
it's bad for Nvidia because Microsoft has lots of competitors and those competitors will not be interested in purchasing Nvidia because of this deal allowing Microsoft to purchase at the big price. That is a very limiting clause.
except they forgot, and so did you, how this limits what companies will be offering to purchase the company. Didn't TFA even mention that the prospect of any Nvidia suitors stepping up has been greatly limited by this clause?
and yes, those lawyers probably have more law school years than I but that still does not explain why they did not think such an lifetime clause was limiting for the company.
All this Microsoft being in Nvidia's pocket also explains why Nvidia had the dual core Tegra2 but was pushing Windows CE for it first even though it was incapable of using both cores. It took them about a year to finally get half-ars Linux support going and Android boomed shortly after that. Another example of idiot corporate lawyers thinking they can deal with Microsoft and walk away a winner.
Elop has probably put lots of little self destruct bombs in every corner of Nokia and left all that's left to Microsoft. That ship seems to be sinking faster and faster.
Slashdot Mirror
I had thought I'd read something about the military hospitals using HL7 and digital records for many years back when Microsoft called Windows Vista. There's some software called Vista that's used in military hospitals or something like that and the military hospitals have been using electronic records for a long time. No surprise TFA was more of a PR stunt since it seems that's what lots of "news" is these days, paid advertising.
LoB
I've seen responses from the Kronos group and it appears this is indeed a Microsoft FUD stunt with issues brought up having been remedied months ago or other actions taking place to mitigate the issues. As expected, Microsoft is starting their FUD campaign and using the same old way of doing it.
LoB
correct, they _could_ be right but since they are well known for spreading FUD about competitors their warning flares look like clown faces in the sky. I would much rather see anyone else make statements about this than them. Especially since they are promoting some other direct interface to graphics drivers by the browser.
if WebGL is really this flawed then it will fail on its own.
LoB
if it really is that bad then it will fail on its own as more and more attack vectors get listed. Adding security after the fact is not likely to help with compatibility and constantly breaking compatibility while creating a new standard is a tough road.
I'm surprised such large corporate backers would be pushing such flawed software too.
LoB
and hopefully they've designed in ways to mitigate security issues.
If WebGL and OpenCL are as holy as some are saying then some large companies are completely missing the security boat. It still seems like this should be something Microsoft takes up with those groups supporting WebGL instead of public releases stating 'it may do this' or someone 'might do that', etc. This makes their statements a marketing ploy no matter if it's true or not.
if it is as bad as Microsoft says then it will fail on its own.
LoB
we've already seen there are many options for passenger/private vehicles and most of those are not effective for heavy equipment(diesels). Yet here is all this talk about trying to convert 100% of all vehicles on the road to biofuels. Bullshit to that I say. The world is not black or white and people should get a clue that those posting how impossible it is to convert 100% of the vehicles to X, Y, or Z technology are either protectionists, ludites, or something else other than knowledgeable. IMO
LoB
so this "independent research" has also been done on Microsoft's browser integration to the graphics card also? I think we're on the same page on that but this bit about Microsoft calling out WebGL as trouble is 100% marketing FUD and a business method well used by them. If they called out why their own implementation was the correct one that would be one thing but there is no mention of Microsoft's own bypass of the OS and giving the browser direct access to the graphics card.
Are Apple/BSD, UNIX and GNU/Linux doing the same thing or do they have to do the same to get some much needed performance boost? Maybe we're going back to the days of DOS where the application had their own hardware drivers.
LoB
yup, they were successful in curtailing OpenGL support and eventually got DirectX to a point where it could be used. It took years and billions of dollars but they were successful. that has nothing to do with what's going on with WebGL or are you saying that in 10 years Microsoft's solution will be usable?
LoB
or like Java, C++, OpenGL, etc. I can't wait for the day Microsoft, instead of putting out FUD, they put out press releases stating their existing software is better than the up and coming stuff because of X, Y, and Z. That would mean a "new" kind of company and actual competition.
Did you notice MSRC report targets the drivers when Microsoft is responsible for providing the driver interfaces to the kernel and approving the drivers? Don't forget, Microsoft is building direct video interfaces into their browser too and I didn't see a word mentioned about that. Seems like we're going backwards these days. Facebook is looking more and more like AOL and Windows is looking more and more like DOS by bringing the hardware closer to the application. They are saying the design of Windows is insufficient to provide proper abstraction and performance it would seem.
LoB
did they bring this up to the WebGL Working Group or is this a PR piece to spread FUD about something they don't control and want gone? It may or may not be a valid point but they don't get to have their cake and eat it too. So instead of Microsoft working with the WebGL WG at Kronos and providing security APIs to the driver vendors to help secure the platform, they spread FUD about how things might be insecure. And doesn't Microsoft have to "approve" drivers so wouldn't it be their responsibility to prevent poor drivers from enabling security circumvention at the OS level?
This looks like 100% pure MS FUD and it's not surprising since Microsoft's business methods do not promote cross platform API's because of the threat of reducing the importance of the Windows platform in the market.
I remember VRML and remember SIGGraph when all the world was buzzing about 3D on the web. Lots of cool tech and it's about time.
LoB
probably because they have a history of not doing well with security. Microsoft always goes out of their way 'calling the kettle black' when they don't want people using something they don't control so its no wonder people here mock them and point the finger back to them. Have you asked yourself why Microsoft would make such a public statement about WebGL? what is their position on OpenGL and cross platform 3D and why is that? Is Microsoft even part of the WebGL Working Group? Maybe Microsoft should be the ones STFU.
LoB
they created ActiveX in response to Java applets and the threat that someone else's API's could become dominant. This is normal business for Microsoft and just like how they created Direct3D to counter the spreading OpenGL API's in the 90s, WebGL is probably too much of a platform threat to support so they'll do the typical FUD thing and say it sucks, it's bad and it's dangerous while they're working on their own replacement which will solve world hunger according to their press releases and up until it actually ships with about 50% of what WebGL had when they started.
They must do everything they know how to keep profits rolling and 3D is finally catching on so it's back to their form of business. FUD before crud.
LoB
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=moran
need more be said?
LoB
it was a joke you moran. They've got enough cash to purchase a number of Skye's.
LoB
they are trying to drive up Windows based PC sales. They have been flat and Microsoft needs ways to help pay for purchasing Skype. They might also have pulled code off of the XBox, which is multi-core, and the code probably required a 2nd core to shovel some processing off to and they didn't want to rework it for single core systems.
LoB
I'll do it for you.... TROLL
LoB
the reporting is as if the stories were outsourced and 10 year olds were asked to read the reports. Not only that, I've seen stock footage shown as representing what was happening instead of footage of the actual event. I find that more and more people are just watching "the news" for the weather or traffic and not the reports. And what is up with local news showing stories of what happened in Timbucktoo when it has no effect or relationship to local events, news, or even culture?
FCC, it's not the internet which is killing local news, they have been killing themselves over the past couple of decades.
LoB
no, that doesn't work again patent trolls who will have not products which your "vast patent portfolio" can be leveraged again. And if you don't think Microsoft fought this vigorously, they took it all the way to the Supreme Court. So this is not going to convince big companies they need more patents. That is being done by Microsoft, Apple, and Oracle now by going after Android using vendors and promotes the concept of mutual assured destruction in the patent field much like how the cold war concept caused the nuclear weapon build up.
In the current climate of Apple, Microsoft, Oracle and others trying to shut down Android, we will not likely see those vendors joining in on a workable patent reform bill because that would end their war on Android. Nothing will change because of this i4i case and nothing meaningful will get passed to stop these things considering the lobby dollars these vendors wield. IMO
LoB
we're already seeing Microsoft using their old vfat patent to hammer the use of Linux and in some cases, they are asking for licensing fees which are about equal to what they themselves charge for the whole OS. I think Barnes & Noble are the only ones fighting this and we've seen HTC is paying $5/dev. So I doubt we'll see Microsoft 'learning' from this and changing their ways or even joining a fight to change the patent laws if that means they lose the ability to hound Linux vendors for money for MS claimed IP.
I still get laugh out of the name of the company, i4i( eye for eye as in 'an eye for an eye' ), considering they went after Microsoft.
LoB
mush mouth #2, I don't need to show you no stinking MBA to know that this was a dumb move by Nvidia. But you obviously don't know enough to discuss the pros/cons of this and seem to think it's an anit-Microsoft issue and not about Nvidia. Where's the conspiracy theory spin? You forgot that one.
LoB
hey mush mouth, so YOU were there and know that they weighed what an open ended clause like that would mean and know that Microsoft would have dropped Nvidia if they wanted an closing to that clause?
Well excuse me for not being in the room when that happened.
and one more thing mush mouth, there's no conspiracy here except the one YOU are making up and this is not an anti-MS topic other than the dumb response of this sub-thread OP.
LoB
it's bad for Nvidia because Microsoft has lots of competitors and those competitors will not be interested in purchasing Nvidia because of this deal allowing Microsoft to purchase at the big price. That is a very limiting clause.
LoB
except they forgot, and so did you, how this limits what companies will be offering to purchase the company. Didn't TFA even mention that the prospect of any Nvidia suitors stepping up has been greatly limited by this clause?
and yes, those lawyers probably have more law school years than I but that still does not explain why they did not think such an lifetime clause was limiting for the company.
All this Microsoft being in Nvidia's pocket also explains why Nvidia had the dual core Tegra2 but was pushing Windows CE for it first even though it was incapable of using both cores. It took them about a year to finally get half-ars Linux support going and Android boomed shortly after that. Another example of idiot corporate lawyers thinking they can deal with Microsoft and walk away a winner.
LoB
yeah baby!
LoB
Elop has probably put lots of little self destruct bombs in every corner of Nokia and left all that's left to Microsoft. That ship seems to be sinking faster and faster.
LoB