Your company got what they deserved. If they are incapable of determining the quality of work that comes in, they deserve to get ripped off. I'm happy that Indians are smart enough to realize that they can fleece money of stupid companies like yours.
Finally then there will be a point where quality code will fetch a higher premium and then hopefully people like you will get a raise. (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're competent.)
The operating system functionality has overshadowed its theoretical computer science definition. If Apple isn't confident of all the bits it ships to its users, maybe it shouldn't ship them?
The end effect matters the most to me, Not what was in somebody head.
I don't think Vista was a disaster. The core of the OS was and is rock solid. Vista shares a ton of code with Server 2k8 and I dont recall anyone complaining about the stability of 2k8 any more so than 2k3.
Vista had bugs on release day. People hated the bugs. bugs have been since fixed. people still hate it.
7 is just going to prove that they didn't have to change much from the current form of Vista for people to like it. (or feel that it was stable)
From all indications, Win7 will wipe Vista from the Earth like WinXP did with WinME.
But Slashdot told me that Win7 is really Vista ! It cant be good !
Even so, there is no equivalence in WinXP vs ME and 7 vs Vista. XP was a completely new kernel and a continuation of the NT code branch. 7 might repair Vistas terrible reputation, but if it did that, that would only prove how powerful negative reviews are.
MS DID fuck up the Vista release, nobody can doubt that. It *was* a buggy POS at release time. But after SP2 (sigh..) its as good as XP for me. Getting people to reverse their opinions is hard.
How about comparing it with something that was released at the same time? Compare it with XP. Win9X is out of active development. However NT and OSX kernels are still in active development.
Apple has forced users on the upgrade treadmill FAR more often than Microsoft. I can run all the latest software on XP. Try doing that with OSX 10.0 (or whatever version you can update it to, without paying anything)
Hell.. Apple charged iPod touch users money for updating the firmware.
The Windows servers at my office have grinding away for years without any issues. (not years of uptime.. have to reboot for updates and shit)
OTOH, the first time I put ubuntu (7.x IIRC) on my laptop it crashed while trying to resume from suspend. I would never trust the ubuntu distro atleast for anything critical.
public option is just an option. its in no way free; you still have to pay premiums. Also, its not guaranteed to be successful. For e.g. doctors may not like the rates and wont sign up or govt might do a crappy job and it ends up not working. In which case you can switch back to whatever you were using.
What youre probably complaining about is the universal health care part which is subsidized by taxpayers. that has nothing to do whatsoever with the public option. even if you choose not to insure them, you are going to end up paying for them anyway when they show up needing expensive life saving treatment in the emergency room.
There i'snt a *single* investor in the entire united states who would give money (I'm talking about serious money..) to a startup who *doesn't* want to patent whatever tech their business is going to produce.
Also, given that the big corporates like Oracle, Sun, MS, Apple get sued on a daily basis, having a big patent chest is the best thing they can do to protect themselves. In fact not patenting tech they produce could be seen as negligent behavior and shareholders could sue. MS has over ten thousand patents and have *hardly* sued anybody (compared to the more litigious 'cool' company elsewhere in california) , its just childish to single them out. But hey, its a free country..:p
A lot of the time, that's as easy as a recompile, and since the source code is just right there....
Sorry, this is bullshit. "Just Recompile" only works if the original source code was written with portability in mind. If you think that "most" of the applications are written with portability in mind, you're sadly deluded.
But that's not even the main issue. If you are not the original programmer of the application, Porting a moderately big application, like say OpenOffice (or any part of it) would require a huge team of programmers to fix portability bugs and run regression tests.
What you say might work for tiny 1-2 man projects.
Being infected with a virus has very little to do with security. Currently, on any platform it is impossible to know in advance conclusively whether a bunch of executable bits are going to cause harm.
When moving from 98 to XP/2K, the perfect time to nudge people to a non-admin by default setup, as was the case on NT, MS made some really retarded decisions (probably motivated by marketing than engineering) and thereby explicitly legitimized software that expected users to run as Admins even though it didn't really need any admin specific rights. Eventually with vista they had to swallow the bitter pill (along with changes to the driver model and other fun stuff which drove users mad).
Lastly, I wish MS didn't constantly patch their OS to be compatible with buggy s/w, something the Linux dev. community has rightly chosen not to do. (Although would be nice to have a standardized driver interface:P)
The Conficker vulnerability was patched months before it was seen exploited in the wild. All that means is people aren't up to date with security updates. I can understand some people being hesitant to install windows updates in case they break anything. [Though out of tens of thousands of updates, only a handful have broken software that was coded properly in the first place] But security updates should be installed automatically. I would argue that this should be the default option. If companies want they can turn it off but it should be on by default for home users.
I disagree. I think the main reason people dot write software for Linux is because Linux users haven't demonstrated their purchasing power for well written software. Even selling a few thousand units/month @ $50 for a small dev team would be worth the effort. Everyone seems to assume that Linux users are cheapskates and just want free stuff. Maybe true, may not be true. It has yet to be tested.
An 'operating system' is extremely loosely defined. Depending on who the chosen expert was , the definition could be twisted to mean anything. Also if you actually read the verdict, the fact that there was bundling was the _LEAST_ of the concerns of the judge.
The main point what turned the decision was when it was revealed that MS spent around $100 million to develop IE and gave it away for FREE thus harming the competition and being anti-competitive.
It doesn't ship with Windows thats the point. All the other crap in the first graph ships with Linux. AFAICT. Either way, If we start to include all the proprietary or open source audio solutions that each game ships with then we might have to add 200 extra nodes to each graph.
There are lots of viruses, malware etc that you can get from so-called drive-by installs. Open ports are another way that is still infecting lots of machines
IMO, 'Most' is accurate. Unless you want to include unpatched machines that get haxxored. When it comes to unpatched security vulnerabilities windows isn't special, every OS is vulnerable.
Slashdot Mirror
Your company got what they deserved. If they are incapable of determining the quality of work that comes in, they deserve to get ripped off. I'm happy that Indians are smart enough to realize that they can fleece money of stupid companies like yours.
Finally then there will be a point where quality code will fetch a higher premium and then hopefully people like you will get a raise. (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're competent.)
The operating system functionality has overshadowed its theoretical computer science definition. If Apple isn't confident of all the bits it ships to its users, maybe it shouldn't ship them?
And the most restrictive rules about where I'm allowed to use those tools
Like what?
The end effect matters the most to me, Not what was in somebody head.
I don't think Vista was a disaster. The core of the OS was and is rock solid. Vista shares a ton of code with Server 2k8 and I dont recall anyone complaining about the stability of 2k8 any more so than 2k3.
Vista had bugs on release day. People hated the bugs. bugs have been since fixed. people still hate it.
7 is just going to prove that they didn't have to change much from the current form of Vista for people to like it. (or feel that it was stable)
From all indications, Win7 will wipe Vista from the Earth like WinXP did with WinME.
But Slashdot told me that Win7 is really Vista ! It cant be good !
Even so, there is no equivalence in WinXP vs ME and 7 vs Vista. XP was a completely new kernel and a continuation of the NT code branch. 7 might repair Vistas terrible reputation, but if it did that, that would only prove how powerful negative reviews are.
MS DID fuck up the Vista release, nobody can doubt that. It *was* a buggy POS at release time. But after SP2 (sigh..) its as good as XP for me. Getting people to reverse their opinions is hard.
How about comparing it with something that was released at the same time? Compare it with XP. Win9X is out of active development. However NT and OSX kernels are still in active development.
Apple has forced users on the upgrade treadmill FAR more often than Microsoft. I can run all the latest software on XP. Try doing that with OSX 10.0 (or whatever version you can update it to, without paying anything)
Hell.. Apple charged iPod touch users money for updating the firmware.
The Windows servers at my office have grinding away for years without any issues. (not years of uptime.. have to reboot for updates and shit)
OTOH, the first time I put ubuntu (7.x IIRC) on my laptop it crashed while trying to resume from suspend. I would never trust the ubuntu distro atleast for anything critical.
Less foaming at the mouth. More facts.. OK?
You mean medicare? :p
-
public option is just an option. its in no way free; you still have to pay premiums. Also, its not guaranteed to be successful. For e.g. doctors may not like the rates and wont sign up or govt might do a crappy job and it ends up not working. In which case you can switch back to whatever you were using.
What youre probably complaining about is the universal health care part which is subsidized by taxpayers. that has nothing to do whatsoever with the public option. even if you choose not to insure them, you are going to end up paying for them anyway when they show up needing expensive life saving treatment in the emergency room.
There i'snt a *single* investor in the entire united states who would give money (I'm talking about serious money..) to a startup who *doesn't* want to patent whatever tech their business is going to produce.
Also, given that the big corporates like Oracle, Sun, MS, Apple get sued on a daily basis, having a big patent chest is the best thing they can do to protect themselves. In fact not patenting tech they produce could be seen as negligent behavior and shareholders could sue. MS has over ten thousand patents and have *hardly* sued anybody (compared to the more litigious 'cool' company elsewhere in california) , its just childish to single them out. But hey, its a free country.. :p
i'm running vista on a gaming machine i built last year. no reinstalls, no bluescreens.
your fud though, could use some updating..
A lot of the time, that's as easy as a recompile, and since the source code is just right there....
Sorry, this is bullshit. "Just Recompile" only works if the original source code was written with portability in mind. If you think that "most" of the applications are written with portability in mind, you're sadly deluded.
But that's not even the main issue. If you are not the original programmer of the application, Porting a moderately big application, like say OpenOffice (or any part of it) would require a huge team of programmers to fix portability bugs and run regression tests.
What you say might work for tiny 1-2 man projects.
That's OK, what I'd like to know is does anyone take these loons seriously?
More like waiting for your mom to get drunk. :p
I kid..
>3: Those that are to stupid to use Linux, BSD, Solaris, etc.
I guess insulting prospective users is the new strategy of F/OSS...
Being infected with a virus has very little to do with security. Currently, on any platform it is impossible to know in advance conclusively whether a bunch of executable bits are going to cause harm.
When moving from 98 to XP/2K, the perfect time to nudge people to a non-admin by default setup, as was the case on NT, MS made some really retarded decisions (probably motivated by marketing than engineering) and thereby explicitly legitimized software that expected users to run as Admins even though it didn't really need any admin specific rights. Eventually with vista they had to swallow the bitter pill (along with changes to the driver model and other fun stuff which drove users mad).
Lastly, I wish MS didn't constantly patch their OS to be compatible with buggy s/w, something the Linux dev. community has rightly chosen not to do. (Although would be nice to have a standardized driver interface :P)
Is that why Vista adoption has been so awesome?
I wonder who was buying MS software when there were at 0% market share and as you say they don't produce quality code.
Alright later, back to the real world...
Who does the testing for Linux? just curious :p
The Conficker vulnerability was patched months before it was seen exploited in the wild. All that means is people aren't up to date with security updates. I can understand some people being hesitant to install windows updates in case they break anything. [Though out of tens of thousands of updates, only a handful have broken software that was coded properly in the first place] But security updates should be installed automatically. I would argue that this should be the default option. If companies want they can turn it off but it should be on by default for home users.
Ultimately its just a lack of awareness.
I'd rather trust the "hobby" coders than the people who replaced my driver with a dud.
Ironic since the wireless problems in Linux are legendary. If we all went by one-chance rule like you all software would be unusable.
I wonder since you cant tolerate any bugs, what software do you use? I must get in on this bug-free bandwagon..
The other people who are getting it for free most likely wouldn't have bought the music anyway.
I doubt it. A similar analogy would be if users were unable to get pirated copies of Windows they would all switch to OSX/Linux/BSD etc
Irrelevant. I bet when you patched the vulnerability, it might have also affected 'some' people. Its enough that the potential was there.
I disagree. I think the main reason people dot write software for Linux is because Linux users haven't demonstrated their purchasing power for well written software. Even selling a few thousand units/month @ $50 for a small dev team would be worth the effort. Everyone seems to assume that Linux users are cheapskates and just want free stuff. Maybe true, may not be true. It has yet to be tested.
An 'operating system' is extremely loosely defined. Depending on who the chosen expert was , the definition could be twisted to mean anything. Also if you actually read the verdict, the fact that there was bundling was the _LEAST_ of the concerns of the judge.
The main point what turned the decision was when it was revealed that MS spent around $100 million to develop IE and gave it away for FREE thus harming the competition and being anti-competitive.
It doesn't ship with Windows thats the point. All the other crap in the first graph ships with Linux. AFAICT. Either way, If we start to include all the proprietary or open source audio solutions that each game ships with then we might have to add 200 extra nodes to each graph.
There are lots of viruses, malware etc that you can get from so-called drive-by installs. Open ports are another way that is still infecting lots of machines
IMO, 'Most' is accurate. Unless you want to include unpatched machines that get haxxored. When it comes to unpatched security vulnerabilities windows isn't special, every OS is vulnerable.