How about the ability to finally solve the NAT problem and allow secure connectivity worldwide, without needing tunnels, overlapping address spaces or anything with the letters "VPN" in it any more? If my phone, my laptop, and my business all speak IPv6 and have certificates, it means my phone can talk directly to my mailserver in a secure way. I could access an internal website over port 80 and be completely confident that it was secure, if only IPv6 with IPSEC became a reality.
IPv6 is a huge, huge deal to connectivity. Right now every gaming console, every phone and mobile device relies on hacks upon hacks upon IPv4 to operate correctly and communicate. IPv6 solves virtually all of these problems in one fell swoop.
Agreed, and as he said, if you apply all the right practices, your connection strings will be encrypted, your app won't do something stupid, your IIS worker will be a limited rights user, etc, etc.
It will be released as the highest level of critical update on Windows Update for home and small business users and for WSUS for small to large enterprise users that control patch distribution in-house. The former will be able to choose to ignore the update (but if they ever called support, the question "Are you up to date?" could come up) and the latter can even choose to require the update by a deadline in their business. If some department neglects to schedule and manually install at an appropriate time, the server will follow orders from on high and install that update, department head be damned.
Actually I'm not sure if the update will require a restart, but it probably will.
Microsoft isn't an I.T. company, they're a software company. They've branched into different spaces sometimes, and they dogfood their own products for other companies, but Microsoft also has other companies, "I.T. companies" manage their I.T. There was a recent article about Microsoft switching vendors for I.T. support and help-desk personnel.
Maybe they just didn't want to support millions (ah, who are we kidding, hundreds) of bloggers anymore and decided Wordpress was a good place to shunt them off to. Everyone wins, really.
I think without Bill Gates, "closed" software would have become the norm anyway. For one thing, the vast majority of users do not need and would not care a whim about the source code. In fact, in the early days of the internet when most people downloaded software via 56k or acquired it via floppies (perhaps even floppies that were floppy!) the additional time or material would be wasted on most.
Finally, even if we assume your apocryphal story that Microsoft made closed software the norm, what of client support? I for one thing would not want to give my source code to a client and agree to *support* said source code. I highly doubt IBM would. It'd be a support nightmare. There's a reason Red Hat, SUSE, et al. are typically not much less expensive than Microsoft's stack. In some cases (virtualization, some enterprise licensing), they're vastly more expensive! The upshot is that the platform is more diverse and more easily extended by the end-user. The downside is that a less standardized operating system, with its diverse kernel modules and implementations, is more expensive for *everyone*.
So, I don't think Microsoft had much to do with the proliferation of closed source software. It was only natural.
Not only is it cheap, but even the Atoms are getting 64-bit across the range with the next revision. I don't think there will be any non-64 bit chips in AMD or Intel's lineup at that point.
Even if you are, shouldn't you be using virtualization by now? Sure, you might cut into your margins if your hypervisor can't share pages between VMs (and even that can sometimes doesn't help as the VMs become more and more out of sync), but I'd say the security benefits outweigh the downsides.
This is perhaps the single greatest reason for moving to VDI versus shared remote desktops on a single server.
Of course they give away (or nearly give away) software to charities/non-profits with an ulterior motive. If people learn to use and work best with Microsoft stuff there, then if they move to the for-profit sector that will be what they're familiar with.
The alternative though is even sillier than suggesting they have some malicious motive for giving away software. That is, would you say that Microsoft *should* charge schools, NGOs and charities the same as businesses? I mean, really?
Not to mention that developers could spend days or weeks optimizing for the console's 3 graphics processors and have it pay off with a smooth experience. But with nearly a hundred desktop GPUs in varying usage, with varying levels of DirectX and OpengL support, there's not that "easy target" for optimization.
They won't have to register though, what will happen is they will simply say to that they are fully licensed until 2012.
In the meantime, they promote to said organizations through other channels the donation-based options for getting Microsoft software. That is, free (as in beer) software.
Well, and if you don't need it [the guarantees of ACID], why pay for it? I mean, if you have to spend any amount of time thinking about "How do I make that work?" that's a cost.
Whereas if all you care about is updating individual records without global consistency, well, don't enforce global consistency.
The military has special networks and machines for accessing classified materials, the idea being defense in depth and in layers. That is, just because you accessed a document doesn't expose it to exceptional risk *because* they require the machine that accesses said document to meet security requirements itself. There are, as far as I know, several tiers to this level of information security.
My Android phone (Droid X) sees "the number is 07921 123456 bye" as containing a number. The number is underlined, and if I press it it opens up the dialer. I'm using Google Voice for SMS though so I don't know if that would affect it. I can also press and hold to copy the entire message text, which I can then paste into the text field and edit, and then re-copy if I want just the number. Finally, I tested pasting into the dialer's entry field, and pasted in just fine as "07921 123456".
I felt like I better knew the character of GLaDOS from four or five hours of gameplay with Portal and sparse dialog than I know the characters of most movies.
The gameplay mechanic being insidiously clever and fun helped too.
Slashdot Mirror
How about the ability to finally solve the NAT problem and allow secure connectivity worldwide, without needing tunnels, overlapping address spaces or anything with the letters "VPN" in it any more? If my phone, my laptop, and my business all speak IPv6 and have certificates, it means my phone can talk directly to my mailserver in a secure way. I could access an internal website over port 80 and be completely confident that it was secure, if only IPv6 with IPSEC became a reality.
IPv6 is a huge, huge deal to connectivity. Right now every gaming console, every phone and mobile device relies on hacks upon hacks upon IPv4 to operate correctly and communicate. IPv6 solves virtually all of these problems in one fell swoop.
IPv6 makes IPSEC a mandatory part of the specification, it's optional for IPv4.
Agreed, and as he said, if you apply all the right practices, your connection strings will be encrypted, your app won't do something stupid, your IIS worker will be a limited rights user, etc, etc.
It will be released as the highest level of critical update on Windows Update for home and small business users and for WSUS for small to large enterprise users that control patch distribution in-house. The former will be able to choose to ignore the update (but if they ever called support, the question "Are you up to date?" could come up) and the latter can even choose to require the update by a deadline in their business. If some department neglects to schedule and manually install at an appropriate time, the server will follow orders from on high and install that update, department head be damned.
Actually I'm not sure if the update will require a restart, but it probably will.
Microsoft isn't an I.T. company, they're a software company. They've branched into different spaces sometimes, and they dogfood their own products for other companies, but Microsoft also has other companies, "I.T. companies" manage their I.T. There was a recent article about Microsoft switching vendors for I.T. support and help-desk personnel.
Maybe they just didn't want to support millions (ah, who are we kidding, hundreds) of bloggers anymore and decided Wordpress was a good place to shunt them off to. Everyone wins, really.
I think without Bill Gates, "closed" software would have become the norm anyway. For one thing, the vast majority of users do not need and would not care a whim about the source code. In fact, in the early days of the internet when most people downloaded software via 56k or acquired it via floppies (perhaps even floppies that were floppy!) the additional time or material would be wasted on most.
Finally, even if we assume your apocryphal story that Microsoft made closed software the norm, what of client support? I for one thing would not want to give my source code to a client and agree to *support* said source code. I highly doubt IBM would. It'd be a support nightmare. There's a reason Red Hat, SUSE, et al. are typically not much less expensive than Microsoft's stack. In some cases (virtualization, some enterprise licensing), they're vastly more expensive! The upshot is that the platform is more diverse and more easily extended by the end-user. The downside is that a less standardized operating system, with its diverse kernel modules and implementations, is more expensive for *everyone*.
So, I don't think Microsoft had much to do with the proliferation of closed source software. It was only natural.
Not only is it cheap, but even the Atoms are getting 64-bit across the range with the next revision. I don't think there will be any non-64 bit chips in AMD or Intel's lineup at that point.
Even if you are, shouldn't you be using virtualization by now? Sure, you might cut into your margins if your hypervisor can't share pages between VMs (and even that can sometimes doesn't help as the VMs become more and more out of sync), but I'd say the security benefits outweigh the downsides.
This is perhaps the single greatest reason for moving to VDI versus shared remote desktops on a single server.
Of course they give away (or nearly give away) software to charities/non-profits with an ulterior motive. If people learn to use and work best with Microsoft stuff there, then if they move to the for-profit sector that will be what they're familiar with.
The alternative though is even sillier than suggesting they have some malicious motive for giving away software. That is, would you say that Microsoft *should* charge schools, NGOs and charities the same as businesses? I mean, really?
Not to mention that developers could spend days or weeks optimizing for the console's 3 graphics processors and have it pay off with a smooth experience. But with nearly a hundred desktop GPUs in varying usage, with varying levels of DirectX and OpengL support, there's not that "easy target" for optimization.
They won't have to register though, what will happen is they will simply say to that they are fully licensed until 2012.
In the meantime, they promote to said organizations through other channels the donation-based options for getting Microsoft software. That is, free (as in beer) software.
Well, and if you don't need it [the guarantees of ACID], why pay for it? I mean, if you have to spend any amount of time thinking about "How do I make that work?" that's a cost.
Whereas if all you care about is updating individual records without global consistency, well, don't enforce global consistency.
Maybe excel was just the right tool for the job? It's quick and easy to use, and to reformat the graphs.
I know the Linux tools tend to be a little longer between tweaking, rendering and displaying, so a fast WYSIWIG tool works just fine.
Light Peak should be available by the second half of 2011 in higher end desktops from OEMs that have opted into it.
Lyndonville is the codename of the 25nm flash based SSDs, I believe.
A Starcraft 2 player commented on an animation/effect glitch in a custom game as a "sprite" issue.
He was wrong but, hey, at least he knew what sprites were.
The military has special networks and machines for accessing classified materials, the idea being defense in depth and in layers. That is, just because you accessed a document doesn't expose it to exceptional risk *because* they require the machine that accesses said document to meet security requirements itself. There are, as far as I know, several tiers to this level of information security.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIPRNET
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIPRNET
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JWICS
I don't think a machine that has access to the internet is allowed to have access to any of these networks. I'm not sure on the implementation though.
If you managed to break public key cryptography, do tell. I assure you, you'll be quite famous.
My Android phone (Droid X) sees "the number is 07921 123456 bye" as containing a number. The number is underlined, and if I press it it opens up the dialer. I'm using Google Voice for SMS though so I don't know if that would affect it. I can also press and hold to copy the entire message text, which I can then paste into the text field and edit, and then re-copy if I want just the number. Finally, I tested pasting into the dialer's entry field, and pasted in just fine as "07921 123456".
You forgot about Activision. I think at this point it's a race to the bottom, and Bobby Kotick is winning.
What settings are missing?
Most of the ticket sales goes to the studios, the theatres make most of their money on concessions.
LISP user.
We're like, totally mostly sure that nothing could go wrong.
I felt like I better knew the character of GLaDOS from four or five hours of gameplay with Portal and sparse dialog than I know the characters of most movies.
The gameplay mechanic being insidiously clever and fun helped too.