Yeah they raised to bar really high. They mercifully allowed users to only run only one app at a time. After all who needs more than one really? Not only that, the users would need to ask Apples permission to install applications without voiding their warranty.
I wonder if Apple fanbois realize they're fanbois..
Um, so? Not everything in a research lab gets converted into a product. You're thinking on the level of a consumer,.. I thought this site was for technical people? You mean nobody even looked at the code to see if there is any cool tech in there? You mean people are just spouting anti-ms drivel without knowing the first thing about writing operating systems? Say it ain't so !
My experience was exactly opposite, so there. My anecdote is better than your anecdote. Experience is just another word for opinion based on past events. This is separate from facts. Lets focus on the latter.
Why don't you provide some technical counter points instead of typing more drivel?
Or are you following the Slashdot model?
Step 1. Call X bullshit/crap/garbage Step 2. Get called on your BS claims. Step 3. Say it is based on your "experience".
But behind Door # 2 there is Slashdot Model #2
Step 1. Call X bullshit/crap/garbage Step 2. Get a "Citation Needed" reply Step 3. Thread fades with pedantic half-truths that never resolves the original argument.
I'd say its strongly co-related. Making out the majority of users of MS software as some mindless drones that just use whatever is given to them is kinda childish.
Also, what makes you think you're any good at evaluating the quality of software? Why are you a better judge of software than the collective millions of people who choose to continue using a piece of software? Have you written or managed a hundred million lines of code software project? Have you developed test suits that test software quality ? Maybe you have. But my guess is like the rest of the people calling MS names, you have not. Hell, every user has a subjective opinion of quality and they choose to use software that *THEY* think has good quality. That is how its been for.. I don't know.. centuries?
It does because the seperation that was designed in has become completely irrelevant in practice on many systems.
OK, is that your position? I don't disagree. A far cry from implying NT does not have privilege separation. Or that it has anything to do with malware.
Proper seperation of admin and user tasks is really the main thing that keeps malware off all platforms but one.
No, its not. NT has had "proper privilege separation" (a stupid phrase repeated mindlessly by the linux-bots every time people mention windows) built into the design. Malware doesn't need admin permissions to mess with the users files.
The main problem is, it is impossible to determine ahead of time whether a collection of bits that's about to be sent to the processor is going to perform unwelcome changes to the computer's state (AKA malware). Popular nix based OSs like Linux and OSX use some form of sudo-y method to prompt for the admin password when installing software, but that's just pushing the responsibility onto the user.
Now, it *is* true that insecure & buggy browsers like IE6 combined with run-as-admin XP mode allow for specific "drive by" exploits where malware gets installed w/o even asking for the users permission, but that has nothing to do with NT.
A *tiny* part of the solution is to use sandboxed secure browsers like IE8 or Chrome that have process & tab isolation (not sure if IE8 has tab isolation) and not have the user run as admin.
Um, because those things aren't new to people or they are simple enough that people can relate to it instantly. Like knowing which kind of key goes in which lock.
If you go to the "switch" website that apple mentions in some of their print ads, you might end up here as a non-mac user.
2) Most everything that I install (even AAAA video games) requests that I reboot the machine after the installation. You and I know that when you *really* have to reboot the machine. Joe Blow doesn't.
Most everything huh? Can you name any recent games that told you to reboot?
So basically Linux allowed you to load up and read/write data from a possibly faulty RAM module. I guess some people haven't yet run into silent data corruption. You kids are so cute...
, or to Google which probably yields about 10 mio. hits if you put "UAC" together with any deragatory term of your choice into it. If that doesn't tell you what's wrong with it, I don't know where to start explaining.
I could do that with sports teams too. Does that mean they aren't professional level sports teams? Using dumb metrics yields dumb results.
Instead of typing all that drivel you could have typed 3 things that you think are wrong with UAC. Atleast superficially it seems to me you're no different from an anti-ms troll.
Part of the reason they use it is because in their estimation MS tools are better. I know, shocking right? Quick, lets insult the users and call them stupid ! That'll show them !!
Whats wrong with UAC? I only get a prompt when I install things, copy/delete files from system directories, or launch admin stuff; the sort of things that I would expect it to ask my permission for.
Haha nice move. Instead of responding to my actual points, call me an astroturfer... w/e.. seems like you were just trolling. Enough time wasted on you..
This doesn't change the fact that they have ample time and resources to fix a significant problem with an OS without forcing consumers to purchase it again just to overcome the issue, even though it is likely only for a short time.
So? Its not a significant bug. They've labeled it as low priority. Hence its their judgment that they don't want to spend time on this. So far they have been accurate in assessing severity of their own OS bugs. Your claim of "forcing" people is only backed by bullshit.
15 year old software is still being supported by other OSes. Unix still has components being developed that are over 15 years old. OSX uses Unix as its core. Linux is updating software (the kernel) even today after over 15 years.
Since Windows 7 contains code that originated in NT 6 and before, they've already demonstrated that they can maintain ~15+ year old code. You really have no clue what you're talking about.
Just as nobody is maintaining the NT6 branch, older kernel branches in Linux are ABSOLUTELY NOT getting ANY security patches. Tell me who is officially releasing patches for Kernel v2.0.39 (released ~2001). I'll tell you.. a grand total of ZERO people, that's who.
Hell, Ubuntu forces you to upgrade the OS every two years since they stop giving out patches. And hey if the upgrade managed to break any existing functionality (which has happened.. only in in EVERY release so far) then sad day for you. You *have* to upgrade.
Thats not even looking at the fact that there has been a significant increase in minimum system requirements from Ubuntu 4.x to Ubuntu 9.x. Tough luck. Ofcource, that gets sweeped under the rug on Slashdot. And yet being the hypocritical bunch of Zealots that they are they find no issues in quarreling about how Vista dropped 5 frames per second compared to XP in some random game benchmark and therefore is the worst OS, etc etc.
The software is maintained by Microsoft and they have access to it. It means that they'd rather spend their money on something we don't want instead of properly supporting what we do want
So far it looks like people want Windows 7. What are you talking about? Software doesn't have infinite service periods. And in the end they are a business, not a charity. If people don't like the fact that Microsoft didn't fix a low priority bug on an 8 year old OS, then maybe the consumers should go to Apple or a Linux vendor. I only keep hearing constantly on this site that switching to Linux is sooo easy and there is a clone for almost any important app. If it is true, then why aren't more people switching?
Microsoft has the one of the longest service period among modern consumer operating systems. Maybe that's not good enough for you.
Its funny how the actual development of software happens BEFORE its release date. The codebase obviously IS greater than 8 years old. A little hard to grasp for some people, I know.
Besides, have you ever heard of code branches? Vista a branch off of the XP/Windows 2003 codebase after XP was released so applying any fix from the Vista tree to XP is not as easy as SP1, SP2 and SP3 development has happened on the XP tree since then. Its definitely possible to back port, but its not a simple task. Maybe you disagree.
Also, since you're so confident that Linux has a longer service period, let me know where I can get free patches for Ubuntu 4.0. or Redhat 7.1 in 2009.
Some people want to develop in better dev environment... or *gasp* using languages they already know. I guess asking for rational thought from apple fanbois is a bit too much..
So in short you just spewed some random vague crap like "funky behavior" "needs extra work" and "Generally a pain" which one could say about any part of any API on any platform.
Here.. list any technology on the Linux platform and I can find more than 50 things that are horribly wrong and fucked up with it without resorting to vague language like you. Actually its so easy a child could do it using Google:p
What hes saying is, if you write Java apps now, you don't need windows, but it automatically works on all platforms. Yet, I don't see too many desktop apps written in Java.
No thanks, I am quite capable myself of deciding what I do or don't want to run on my machine. I don't need some stupid organization deciding that the executable is "safe" enough for me to run.
Besides, bandwidth isn't free. I have a 20GB monthly bandwidth cap on my internet. I don't want to download multi-GB software like games from an internet repository when I can go out and buy it on a DVD.
It depends on the specific case, if you do 100% outsourcing then its going to be tough to judge it without some in-house expertise. It could be as simple as avoid overriding your Dev team by default when it comes to saving costs vs. getting higher quality code. I've seen it happen where some manager starts seeing green $ bills when they see the per hr. rates quoted by some of these outsourcing companies.
When dealing with offshore teams get concrete deadlines and specify detailed milestones on what you want. Outsourcing companies are known to bid on contracts even when they don't have any expertise in the domain. Make sure that doesn't happen. Another thing they frequently do is charge double for half the number of actual developers that will be working on the project. Also, Do not allow any multicultural sensitivities to get in the way. Apart from these more or less obvious points, its hard to go into more detail without knowing specifics of the project.
Determining code quality in general is a tough one. I'd probably ask them to give me access to their internal code base & version control system in addition to any bug tracking system they use. I would ask my developers to keep an eye on any checkins made and do a random sampling & code-review of the code from each individual developer, etc etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah they raised to bar really high. They mercifully allowed users to only run only one app at a time. After all who needs more than one really? Not only that, the users would need to ask Apples permission to install applications without voiding their warranty.
I wonder if Apple fanbois realize they're fanbois..
Um, so? Not everything in a research lab gets converted into a product. You're thinking on the level of a consumer,.. I thought this site was for technical people? You mean nobody even looked at the code to see if there is any cool tech in there? You mean people are just spouting anti-ms drivel without knowing the first thing about writing operating systems? Say it ain't so !
$30 maintenance update
Since you seem to be a kind of a OSX Fanboi.. maybe you know this: Why did they add an anti-malware scan to the OS?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Snow_Leopard#Changes_and_improvements
My experience was exactly opposite, so there. My anecdote is better than your anecdote. Experience is just another word for opinion based on past events. This is separate from facts. Lets focus on the latter.
Why don't you provide some technical counter points instead of typing more drivel?
Or are you following the Slashdot model?
Step 1. Call X bullshit/crap/garbage
Step 2. Get called on your BS claims.
Step 3. Say it is based on your "experience".
But behind Door # 2 there is Slashdot Model #2
Step 1. Call X bullshit/crap/garbage
Step 2. Get a "Citation Needed" reply
Step 3. Thread fades with pedantic half-truths that never resolves the original argument.
I think you should look up what vast majority is.
He didn't imply its proportional.
I'd say its strongly co-related. Making out the majority of users of MS software as some mindless drones that just use whatever is given to them is kinda childish.
Also, what makes you think you're any good at evaluating the quality of software? Why are you a better judge of software than the collective millions of people who choose to continue using a piece of software? Have you written or managed a hundred million lines of code software project? Have you developed test suits that test software quality ? Maybe you have. But my guess is like the rest of the people calling MS names, you have not. Hell, every user has a subjective opinion of quality and they choose to use software that *THEY* think has good quality. That is how its been for .. I don't know.. centuries?
It does because the seperation that was designed in has become completely irrelevant in practice on many systems.
OK, is that your position? I don't disagree. A far cry from implying NT does not have privilege separation. Or that it has anything to do with malware.
The hard lessons learned there were applied
Huh? Where is your evidence for that? And where is your evidence that they *weren't* applied for NT.
More facts, less opinion.
Proper seperation of admin and user tasks is really the main thing that keeps malware off all platforms but one.
No, its not. NT has had "proper privilege separation" (a stupid phrase repeated mindlessly by the linux-bots every time people mention windows) built into the design. Malware doesn't need admin permissions to mess with the users files.
The main problem is, it is impossible to determine ahead of time whether a collection of bits that's about to be sent to the processor is going to perform unwelcome changes to the computer's state (AKA malware). Popular nix based OSs like Linux and OSX use some form of sudo-y method to prompt for the admin password when installing software, but that's just pushing the responsibility onto the user.
Now, it *is* true that insecure & buggy browsers like IE6 combined with run-as-admin XP mode allow for specific "drive by" exploits where malware gets installed w/o even asking for the users permission, but that has nothing to do with NT.
A *tiny* part of the solution is to use sandboxed secure browsers like IE8 or Chrome that have process & tab isolation (not sure if IE8 has tab isolation) and not have the user run as admin.
A decade or two of *nix getting clobbered by bored students hardened it up before WinNT even existed.
Since no code is shared between unix and linux, the above statement is fantastically ignorant.
Um, because those things aren't new to people or they are simple enough that people can relate to it instantly. Like knowing which kind of key goes in which lock.
If you go to the "switch" website that apple mentions in some of their print ads, you might end up here as a non-mac user.
http://www.apple.com/getamac/faq/
So, according to apple, people asking about Windows/Office is the topmost frequently asked question.
112 days??! The environment thanks you...
2) Most everything that I install (even AAAA video games) requests that I reboot the machine after the installation. You and I know that when you *really* have to reboot the machine. Joe Blow doesn't.
Most everything huh? Can you name any recent games that told you to reboot?
So basically Linux allowed you to load up and read/write data from a possibly faulty RAM module. I guess some people haven't yet run into silent data corruption. You kids are so cute...
, or to Google which probably yields about 10 mio. hits if you put "UAC" together with any deragatory term of your choice into it. If that doesn't tell you what's wrong with it, I don't know where to start explaining.
I could do that with sports teams too. Does that mean they aren't professional level sports teams? Using dumb metrics yields dumb results.
Instead of typing all that drivel you could have typed 3 things that you think are wrong with UAC. Atleast superficially it seems to me you're no different from an anti-ms troll.
Part of the reason they use it is because in their estimation MS tools are better. I know, shocking right? Quick, lets insult the users and call them stupid ! That'll show them !!
Whats wrong with UAC? I only get a prompt when I install things, copy/delete files from system directories, or launch admin stuff; the sort of things that I would expect it to ask my permission for.
Haha nice move. Instead of responding to my actual points, call me an astroturfer... w/e.. seems like you were just trolling. Enough time wasted on you..
This doesn't change the fact that they have ample time and resources to fix a significant problem with an OS without forcing consumers to purchase it again just to overcome the issue, even though it is likely only for a short time.
So? Its not a significant bug. They've labeled it as low priority. Hence its their judgment that they don't want to spend time on this. So far they have been accurate in assessing severity of their own OS bugs. Your claim of "forcing" people is only backed by bullshit.
15 year old software is still being supported by other OSes. Unix still has components being developed that are over 15 years old. OSX uses Unix as its core. Linux is updating software (the kernel) even today after over 15 years.
Since Windows 7 contains code that originated in NT 6 and before, they've already demonstrated that they can maintain ~15+ year old code. You really have no clue what you're talking about.
Just as nobody is maintaining the NT6 branch, older kernel branches in Linux are ABSOLUTELY NOT getting ANY security patches. Tell me who is officially releasing patches for Kernel v2.0.39 (released ~2001). I'll tell you.. a grand total of ZERO people, that's who.
Hell, Ubuntu forces you to upgrade the OS every two years since they stop giving out patches. And hey if the upgrade managed to break any existing functionality (which has happened.. only in in EVERY release so far) then sad day for you. You *have* to upgrade.
Thats not even looking at the fact that there has been a significant increase in minimum system requirements from Ubuntu 4.x to Ubuntu 9.x. Tough luck. Ofcource, that gets sweeped under the rug on Slashdot. And yet being the hypocritical bunch of Zealots that they are they find no issues in quarreling about how Vista dropped 5 frames per second compared to XP in some random game benchmark and therefore is the worst OS, etc etc.
The software is maintained by Microsoft and they have access to it. It means that they'd rather spend their money on something we don't want instead of properly supporting what we do want
So far it looks like people want Windows 7. What are you talking about? Software doesn't have infinite service periods. And in the end they are a business, not a charity. If people don't like the fact that Microsoft didn't fix a low priority bug on an 8 year old OS, then maybe the consumers should go to Apple or a Linux vendor. I only keep hearing constantly on this site that switching to Linux is sooo easy and there is a clone for almost any important app. If it is true, then why aren't more people switching?
Microsoft has the one of the longest service period among modern consumer operating systems. Maybe that's not good enough for you.
Its funny how the actual development of software happens BEFORE its release date. The codebase obviously IS greater than 8 years old. A little hard to grasp for some people, I know.
Besides, have you ever heard of code branches? Vista a branch off of the XP/Windows 2003 codebase after XP was released so applying any fix from the Vista tree to XP is not as easy as SP1, SP2 and SP3 development has happened on the XP tree since then. Its definitely possible to back port, but its not a simple task. Maybe you disagree.
Also, since you're so confident that Linux has a longer service period, let me know where I can get free patches for Ubuntu 4.0. or Redhat 7.1 in 2009.
Some people want to develop in better dev environment... or *gasp* using languages they already know. I guess asking for rational thought from apple fanbois is a bit too much..
So in short you just spewed some random vague crap like "funky behavior" "needs extra work" and "Generally a pain" which one could say about any part of any API on any platform.
Here.. list any technology on the Linux platform and I can find more than 50 things that are horribly wrong and fucked up with it without resorting to vague language like you. Actually its so easy a child could do it using Google :p
What hes saying is, if you write Java apps now, you don't need windows, but it automatically works on all platforms. Yet, I don't see too many desktop apps written in Java.
No thanks, I am quite capable myself of deciding what I do or don't want to run on my machine. I don't need some stupid organization deciding that the executable is "safe" enough for me to run.
Besides, bandwidth isn't free. I have a 20GB monthly bandwidth cap on my internet. I don't want to download multi-GB software like games from an internet repository when I can go out and buy it on a DVD.
It depends on the specific case, if you do 100% outsourcing then its going to be tough to judge it without some in-house expertise. It could be as simple as avoid overriding your Dev team by default when it comes to saving costs vs. getting higher quality code. I've seen it happen where some manager starts seeing green $ bills when they see the per hr. rates quoted by some of these outsourcing companies.
When dealing with offshore teams get concrete deadlines and specify detailed milestones on what you want. Outsourcing companies are known to bid on contracts even when they don't have any expertise in the domain. Make sure that doesn't happen. Another thing they frequently do is charge double for half the number of actual developers that will be working on the project. Also, Do not allow any multicultural sensitivities to get in the way. Apart from these more or less obvious points, its hard to go into more detail without knowing specifics of the project.
Determining code quality in general is a tough one. I'd probably ask them to give me access to their internal code base & version control system in addition to any bug tracking system they use. I would ask my developers to keep an eye on any checkins made and do a random sampling & code-review of the code from each individual developer, etc etc.