Since the launch of Vista, the number of UAC prompts triggered by programs has fallen a staggering amount. People who opt in to the customer experience improvement thinger will report which executables caused UAC prompts and other generic information. Vista has reduced this amount by approximately half. Half of the applications no longer require Admin.
So it would be absolutely insane to say that apps aren't needlessly running with excessive privileges. Almost all applications are running with excessive privileges.
Doesn't it seem a little inconsistent when the same content is served with a different scheme because you chose an arbitrary route to reach that content?
I mean, it's not like I'm specifically asking for a stylesheet, instead there are multiple arbitrary paths to identical content that result in a different appearance.
Thanks for enlightening me though, I understand now why my profile page seems to change color every once in a while. I'm clicking through to it sometimes while in a specially themed Slashdot page, and that carries on to my profile.
Oddly, it doesn't do it with the BSD one. But there have been numerous occasions when my profile page has been yellow/tan.
Close, but from what another poster said, the red articles are ones that have just become visible to non-subscribers, and for whatever reason it doesn't pull the red styling off until some random time later.
Anyway, it's not like anyone would credit the Slashdot web devs with making a masterpiece here. Why don't we have a public discussion about how Slashdot trying to embrace "Web 2.0" is actually giving the site a really difficult to understand interface and honestly, makes the site seem schizophrenic at times.
The tagging is horribly broken.
Firehose (nice name... not.) is largely broken and unused.
The new styling system is jarringly inconsistent with the new "Web 2.0" style elements and there seems to be no attempt to reconcile them.
Etc.
Honestly, I preferred Slashdot circa 3 years ago. The only feature I like is the AJAX comment submission, and even that is inconsistent and still doesn't permit many HTML entities or, god forbid, unicode.
After enough adaptations and mutations, you cease to classify an animal as being in the same species as its ancestor. If these adaptations occur based on local conditions, then it isn't uncommon for the two species to coexist. No matter that they haven't evolved yet enough to invent taxes, death is still certain. And if the local adaptations make one species better globally, then you'll see competition and likely, the extinction of the ancestor's species.
You have to remember that the definition of species is vague, that the tree of life has many branches, and that inevitably, all branches terminate. So evolution constantly produces more and more species, and even when there is no branch, a large enough change will be considered the line between one species and another.
Evolution doesn't necessitate extinction, it's the semantics we use to describe it and the cold hard fact that you can't indefinitely sustain every species that has ever existed on Earth.
Agreed, I'm fond of Apple's approach, and I find it difficult to believe that no one has duplicated it so far.
Microsoft tried with "Program Files" but Apple's ".app" folders make more sense even if they're just a quick and dirty abstraction to make the OS easier to use.
Not in the least, do you even care for me to correct you though? Would you even believe me?
See, more important when arguing with someone than knowledge of where they are ignorant, which is petty, is knowledge of where they choose to be ignorant. And if you choose to be ignorant, that is, you choose to make accusations and unsupported statements without opportunity for rebuttal, then there's really no point in further discussion.
Are you going to assume I'm ignorant of how Windows works, or can we have a reasonable discussion? Yes/no? If yes, I'll respond to your shotgun style riposte.
They have changed their milestones, as they opted this time to make sure everything is feature complete or not included in each milestone. Hence, after a milestone, any included feature is solely in a bugtesting phase.
AFAIK this doesn't apply to IE8, which is on its own schedule.
So rather than get hung up on semantics here, why don't you instead treat every bug they patch as a new beta. Since Beta 1 has been released there have been at least 25 internal builds done (they're up to build 7025 internally) and there have been several Windows Updates already applied to one of my machines with knowledge base articles and all.
So let's call each one of those a beta in its own right. So we're up to, what, Beta 27?
Likewise, with the release candidate, everyone is going to test it, they might find a showstopper. They fix it, release a windows update. Now they're on RC2. They might release an internal build as well to do regression testing before the RTM and to ensure fixing the bug didn't cause any other side effects. So all this time, there's multiple concurrent builds being tested.
Four year old Dell that I ran Vista on with 1GB of RAM, the lowest end, first dual-core Pentium that came out (Pentium D 820 I think.)
I ran Vista on it before it came out for a year or so. Sure, I didn't tell the indexing service to search my entire hard drive, but out of the box it wasn't bad. In fact, with a decent video card (Radeon 7500 baby,) it was faster thanks to the offloading of graphics processing to the GPU. Yeah it used a bit much RAM, I don't think anyone contests that. But half of that is their boneheaded move with the task manager, having it report the RAM used as application and indexing cache as being "in use" even though it would be freed as soon as it was needed. So yeah, the kernel used more RAM, ditto with going from Linux 2.4 to 2.6. On the other hand, it used what RAM was left afterward more intelligently.
Anyway, I don't know if this post is necessary because I'm pretty sure you just accused him of using anecdotal evidence and then countered it... with anecdotal evidence.
Build your own PC if you don't want OEMs choosing what you get.
It's that easy. This is akin to buying a car. Most car manufacturers FORCE you to get a car stereo. Usually a bottom of the line crappy car stereo that a minority of people replace because they recognize its faults and have the know-how or ability to pay someone with the know-how to replace it.
See that, car metaphor. You're buying a car, with many different parts. One of those parts is an OS, without which many people would say the car is broken. While a stereo isn't as integral to a car's functionality to most people as an OS is in a PC, it is nevertheless something people expect. And Microsoft isn't obligated to continue to sell and support old products indefinitely. So naturally, they built a better, newer stereo, and now you're going to kick and scream and shout like a kid that they're forcing their new stereo down your throat.
DEAL WITH IT. There are OEMs that sell Linux or OS-free installed boxes. Buy one of those. Or build your own. There are choices, shockingly enough. If you refuse to exercise your economic vote, who cares.
First, if you have a windows box, download the software Orca or SuperOrca, it's an MSI installer (MicroSoft Installer installer:) ) inspection tool.
Obviously this won't work for older installers, but most programs on Windows now use it. Without digressing too much, what you'll want to look for are the requirements. Usually the package will do different things based on the version, but one thing that's increasingly common is something like a "MajorVersion=6" flag for checking Vista.
There is no support for MajorVersion=7 in a lot of software. This is completely ridiculous, completely unsupported, and not recommended. Nevertheless, Microsoft has dealt with Vista being the "least compatible Windows OS yet" because of stupid things like this. (Before, people only checked for MajorVersion equaling 5, and maybe a MinorVersion for checking Server 2003 or XP.)
Obviously this is bad behavior. This is analogous to a package saying it requires a specific kernel version, as opposed to, Kernel >= 2.6.xyz
So, given Microsoft's position, they can either break compatibility again, lose probably millions of dollars due to the ensuing completely braindead media insanity over it, or... they can put a major version of 6 and a minor version of 1.
I know it's ridiculous, but there is more often than not a sane reason, a method behind their madness.
I don't think scattering your data all over the filesystem so far and wide that you need a tightly, TIGHTLY integrated package manager just to keep your system running unless you want to hand-tune every piece of software "good"
Passes are more often than not happily provided to customers that courteously note problems in the theatre. I've gone out of my way more than once to ask the manager for passes for customers. commons" and it would take a drastic increase in payroll and consequently a slightly less drastic increase in the cost of concessions in order to solve. But that increase would result in a lot fewer purchases... Not a good situation.
Please, don't presume to tell me you know how to better operate a theatre. It justs makes you seem like an ass. It's incredibly presumptive of you to think that starting off a conversation with a patron with a threat is somehow going to lead to a situation that helps anyone.
Get up, walk out of the theatre, tell the manager, tell an usher, tell someone who looks important.
At the theatre I work at, we love to kick out the unruly lot that make the movies worse for everyone. Every time we walk in, they hush down, it's hard for us to know where the problems are. It's also a multiplex, with only one usher for many theatres, doing double duty, cleaning and checking the facilities.
So, do something about it. Honestly, having the balls to fix the problem is probably not their problem, more likely, they don't have anything substantive and don't want to interrupt the movie more severely than it already has been. Nothing distracts everyone in the theatre more than an argument in the seats. Make the theatre staff know it's a problem, and it'll probably be taken care of.
But this makes all the currently free browsers have a very real, physical cost. And who will foot the bill? Certainly, I don't think Opera or Mozilla will do -better- in that environment given their significantly less capital to influence ISPs here.
I suspect that removing IE would only increase its market share, because ISPs would -only- distribute the most common browser, and most users wouldn't attempt to get another one after that sort of ordeal. (Regardless of how much easier the 2nd, 3rd, etc. browser install is.)
Slashdot Mirror
How does $800,000,000,000 spread out over 300,000,000 people gain an order of magnitude in that operation?
800,000 / 300 = $2,666.67.
That's 28, I'm sorry, 280 times smaller then the number you posted.
Since the launch of Vista, the number of UAC prompts triggered by programs has fallen a staggering amount. People who opt in to the customer experience improvement thinger will report which executables caused UAC prompts and other generic information. Vista has reduced this amount by approximately half. Half of the applications no longer require Admin.
So it would be absolutely insane to say that apps aren't needlessly running with excessive privileges. Almost all applications are running with excessive privileges.
And you're not supposed to be running as root, EVER, and in a proper installation, only God has that authorization.
Simply put, I highly doubt the NSA gives anyone root access to their machines.
Quoth Anpheus:
"Evolution doesn't necessitate extinction, it's the semantics we use to describe it..."
Doesn't it seem a little inconsistent when the same content is served with a different scheme because you chose an arbitrary route to reach that content?
I mean, it's not like I'm specifically asking for a stylesheet, instead there are multiple arbitrary paths to identical content that result in a different appearance.
Thanks for enlightening me though, I understand now why my profile page seems to change color every once in a while. I'm clicking through to it sometimes while in a specially themed Slashdot page, and that carries on to my profile.
Oddly, it doesn't do it with the BSD one. But there have been numerous occasions when my profile page has been yellow/tan.
Weird, as I'm viewing this comment thread, everything is in green again.
Close, but from what another poster said, the red articles are ones that have just become visible to non-subscribers, and for whatever reason it doesn't pull the red styling off until some random time later.
Anyway, it's not like anyone would credit the Slashdot web devs with making a masterpiece here. Why don't we have a public discussion about how Slashdot trying to embrace "Web 2.0" is actually giving the site a really difficult to understand interface and honestly, makes the site seem schizophrenic at times.
The tagging is horribly broken.
Firehose (nice name... not.) is largely broken and unused.
The new styling system is jarringly inconsistent with the new "Web 2.0" style elements and there seems to be no attempt to reconcile them.
Etc.
Honestly, I preferred Slashdot circa 3 years ago. The only feature I like is the AJAX comment submission, and even that is inconsistent and still doesn't permit many HTML entities or, god forbid, unicode.
After enough adaptations and mutations, you cease to classify an animal as being in the same species as its ancestor. If these adaptations occur based on local conditions, then it isn't uncommon for the two species to coexist. No matter that they haven't evolved yet enough to invent taxes, death is still certain. And if the local adaptations make one species better globally, then you'll see competition and likely, the extinction of the ancestor's species.
You have to remember that the definition of species is vague, that the tree of life has many branches, and that inevitably, all branches terminate. So evolution constantly produces more and more species, and even when there is no branch, a large enough change will be considered the line between one species and another.
Evolution doesn't necessitate extinction, it's the semantics we use to describe it and the cold hard fact that you can't indefinitely sustain every species that has ever existed on Earth.
Agreed, I'm fond of Apple's approach, and I find it difficult to believe that no one has duplicated it so far.
Microsoft tried with "Program Files" but Apple's ".app" folders make more sense even if they're just a quick and dirty abstraction to make the OS easier to use.
That makes no sense. You would excuse an OEM installing a slow Windows XP, Linux, or OS X, but not Vista?
That's inherent bias.
Not in the least, do you even care for me to correct you though? Would you even believe me?
See, more important when arguing with someone than knowledge of where they are ignorant, which is petty, is knowledge of where they choose to be ignorant. And if you choose to be ignorant, that is, you choose to make accusations and unsupported statements without opportunity for rebuttal, then there's really no point in further discussion.
It also speaks a lot to your character.
Are you going to assume I'm ignorant of how Windows works, or can we have a reasonable discussion? Yes/no? If yes, I'll respond to your shotgun style riposte.
They have changed their milestones, as they opted this time to make sure everything is feature complete or not included in each milestone. Hence, after a milestone, any included feature is solely in a bugtesting phase.
AFAIK this doesn't apply to IE8, which is on its own schedule.
So rather than get hung up on semantics here, why don't you instead treat every bug they patch as a new beta. Since Beta 1 has been released there have been at least 25 internal builds done (they're up to build 7025 internally) and there have been several Windows Updates already applied to one of my machines with knowledge base articles and all.
So let's call each one of those a beta in its own right. So we're up to, what, Beta 27?
Likewise, with the release candidate, everyone is going to test it, they might find a showstopper. They fix it, release a windows update. Now they're on RC2. They might release an internal build as well to do regression testing before the RTM and to ensure fixing the bug didn't cause any other side effects. So all this time, there's multiple concurrent builds being tested.
Four year old Dell that I ran Vista on with 1GB of RAM, the lowest end, first dual-core Pentium that came out (Pentium D 820 I think.)
I ran Vista on it before it came out for a year or so. Sure, I didn't tell the indexing service to search my entire hard drive, but out of the box it wasn't bad. In fact, with a decent video card (Radeon 7500 baby,) it was faster thanks to the offloading of graphics processing to the GPU. Yeah it used a bit much RAM, I don't think anyone contests that. But half of that is their boneheaded move with the task manager, having it report the RAM used as application and indexing cache as being "in use" even though it would be freed as soon as it was needed. So yeah, the kernel used more RAM, ditto with going from Linux 2.4 to 2.6. On the other hand, it used what RAM was left afterward more intelligently.
Anyway, I don't know if this post is necessary because I'm pretty sure you just accused him of using anecdotal evidence and then countered it... with anecdotal evidence.
Build your own PC if you don't want OEMs choosing what you get.
It's that easy. This is akin to buying a car. Most car manufacturers FORCE you to get a car stereo. Usually a bottom of the line crappy car stereo that a minority of people replace because they recognize its faults and have the know-how or ability to pay someone with the know-how to replace it.
See that, car metaphor. You're buying a car, with many different parts. One of those parts is an OS, without which many people would say the car is broken. While a stereo isn't as integral to a car's functionality to most people as an OS is in a PC, it is nevertheless something people expect. And Microsoft isn't obligated to continue to sell and support old products indefinitely. So naturally, they built a better, newer stereo, and now you're going to kick and scream and shout like a kid that they're forcing their new stereo down your throat.
DEAL WITH IT. There are OEMs that sell Linux or OS-free installed boxes. Buy one of those. Or build your own. There are choices, shockingly enough. If you refuse to exercise your economic vote, who cares.
Listen, let me make this short and sweet.
First, if you have a windows box, download the software Orca or SuperOrca, it's an MSI installer (MicroSoft Installer installer :) ) inspection tool.
Obviously this won't work for older installers, but most programs on Windows now use it. Without digressing too much, what you'll want to look for are the requirements. Usually the package will do different things based on the version, but one thing that's increasingly common is something like a "MajorVersion=6" flag for checking Vista.
There is no support for MajorVersion=7 in a lot of software. This is completely ridiculous, completely unsupported, and not recommended. Nevertheless, Microsoft has dealt with Vista being the "least compatible Windows OS yet" because of stupid things like this. (Before, people only checked for MajorVersion equaling 5, and maybe a MinorVersion for checking Server 2003 or XP.)
Obviously this is bad behavior. This is analogous to a package saying it requires a specific kernel version, as opposed to, Kernel >= 2.6.xyz
So, given Microsoft's position, they can either break compatibility again, lose probably millions of dollars due to the ensuing completely braindead media insanity over it, or... they can put a major version of 6 and a minor version of 1.
I know it's ridiculous, but there is more often than not a sane reason, a method behind their madness.
I don't think scattering your data all over the filesystem so far and wide that you need a tightly, TIGHTLY integrated package manager just to keep your system running unless you want to hand-tune every piece of software "good"
You accidentally the verb.
It's a murder stimulator?
Passes are more often than not happily provided to customers that courteously note problems in the theatre. I've gone out of my way more than once to ask the manager for passes for customers.
commons" and it would take a drastic increase in payroll and consequently a slightly less drastic increase in the cost of concessions in order to solve. But that increase would result in a lot fewer purchases... Not a good situation.
Please, don't presume to tell me you know how to better operate a theatre. It justs makes you seem like an ass. It's incredibly presumptive of you to think that starting off a conversation with a patron with a threat is somehow going to lead to a situation that helps anyone.
Get up, walk out of the theatre, tell the manager, tell an usher, tell someone who looks important.
At the theatre I work at, we love to kick out the unruly lot that make the movies worse for everyone. Every time we walk in, they hush down, it's hard for us to know where the problems are. It's also a multiplex, with only one usher for many theatres, doing double duty, cleaning and checking the facilities.
So, do something about it. Honestly, having the balls to fix the problem is probably not their problem, more likely, they don't have anything substantive and don't want to interrupt the movie more severely than it already has been. Nothing distracts everyone in the theatre more than an argument in the seats. Make the theatre staff know it's a problem, and it'll probably be taken care of.
But this makes all the currently free browsers have a very real, physical cost. And who will foot the bill? Certainly, I don't think Opera or Mozilla will do -better- in that environment given their significantly less capital to influence ISPs here.
I suspect that removing IE would only increase its market share, because ISPs would -only- distribute the most common browser, and most users wouldn't attempt to get another one after that sort of ordeal. (Regardless of how much easier the 2nd, 3rd, etc. browser install is.)
Regarding the usability of GIMP, I would say that yes, they are geeks living in their parent's basements.
The biggest problem with GIMP is that its developers aren't the intended users. I don't think they "get it."