Indeed, cross-breeding generally results in the deficits in each species diminishing and the strengths aggregating. It's a phenomenon known as heterosis or hybrid vigor. The explanation is simple: dominant genes tend to be those which benefit the species (natural selection will tend to eliminate dominant genes which retard the species). Mating with an organism that contains a vast number of completely different genes which gives you a whole new set of dominant genes. Gene's that you didn't have to mutate in your own ancestral lines It's a genetic gold mine.
That's true to a point, but there's a fundamental difference. Networks are designed to allow different devices which have almost nothing in common to communicate. Keyboards are designed to work with one type of computer and thus build with a specific frame of reference in mind, especially prior to universal device connection technologies (aka, USB). The same is even more true of CPUs, memory, and so on. Additionally, it's important to note that while many older devices speak with Ethernet frames, they speak them over obsolete cable media (coax, older fiber) or they often don't speak TCP or UDP packets instead favoring SPX or NetBIOS. So while your layer 2 technology carries the same name, it really bears little resemblance to Ethernet as it was originally designed.
What does the license tag on the system say? Dimes to dollars it's "Windows 7" or nothing at all. The latter is often used for Vista/7 licenses which were OEM downgraded to XP.
But the license, and therefore the OS you actually bought, is not Windows XP.
7 is excellent, a true successor to XP. XP is only still around because of poor people who don't torrent or have ancient hardware, and incompetent management.
Fixed for me. IT people want desperately to move to Windows 7 because of the number of additional management features you get and because basic things like imaging and drivers are handled so much better.
This gadget was released months ago. I've had it on my Windows 7 desktop at work since May at least.
And before all the whargarbl about MS dropping support... Windows XP was released in 2001. No consumer OS has been supported that long, and few enterprise OSs are. Since Windows 7 was released (that was 2 years ago) netbooks and low end systems have shipped with Windows 7 Starter. XP has not been sold on systems for years, and a four years of security support is not bad at all.
Earlier the same year XP was released, Red Hat 7.1 came out. That's the first version of Red Hat to use the 2.4 kernel (7 had the 2.2 kernel). Later in 2001 they released 7.2, which as a new feature offered support for the ext3 file system. One of the major selling points of XP, you may remember, was the fact that it offered full native USB support. It's time to move on, people.
Yeah, but you're probably a designer or an engineer. Generally, I trust what those people say. It's the executives, lawyers, and (to a somewhat lesser degree) sales and marketing reps I expect to lie through their teeth. That said, I expect the same of any corporate entity. Caveat emptor, indeed.
For any non-trivial function its basically impossible to prove exactly what a computer will do
Bullshit.
If this were remotely true then closed-source applications couldn't be hacked. How exactly do you think you crack and application which requires a software key or has a DRM requirement? How do you think they jailbreak game consoles with saved games? The magic of coincidence? Of course not. The look at the binary code, see what it's doing, disassemble/decompile what they can, and trap all network I/O and file I/O. If you really want to know what WP7 is doing, you can reverse engineer it. If DRM -- which is specifically designed to be difficult to reverse engineer or circumvent -- if DRM can be understood with just binary access, the behavior of an OS on a phone which lacks this design focus should not be that difficult.
Other than being a goodwill gesture (and arguably opening MS up to fraud lawsuits if they are found to be lying), this release doesn't do much at all. However, given what would happen to MS if the code they release here is found to be anything other than what is actually running, I don't believe that they would risk being so stupid as to release anything but the actual source code. MS is in no position in the mobile marketplace to suffer such a gaffe.
I agree. I had quite a habit at one point of downloading games, but now that Steam exists the games are -- in general -- easier to get and use than the hoops you had to jump through for pirated games (which, at the time, were still less annoying that the hoops the retail games made you jump through). Steam is successful because they offer something better than a pirated game. They provide value, and therefore get my money. They also have specials around most major holidays that knock the socks off of anything else. 75% off major games isn't uncommon.
The only games on Steam that piss me off are those which still use GFWL or some other third party DRM in addition to Steam. I do not buy those games, but because there are enough games for me to play otherwise, I don't go pirate them either. Steam cured my penchant for piracy more than any draconian software scheme did. Carrot > stick.
Most of these programs don't install, in the traditional sense. They copy themselves to %userprofile%\AppData. There are ways to protect a system from that but it's not easy to set up and still allow for all the oddball programs your users need.
It's not like Linux stops you from running "rm ~ -rf". You don't need root to run that. This is the equivalent. It doesn't destroy the system. It's not particularly invasive. It does, however, completely mess with user data (toggling the Hidden bit or moving the data is common for these rogue applications, as is automatically running on login). I've never understood why sysadmins think you need root access to damage a computer system. The data is the irreplaceable part, and users - for obvious reasons - have read/write access to their own data.
Just because it's accurate doesn't mean it tells the whole story. It's called "spin". Submitter clearly wants Office 365's SLA to look bad, so he focuses on the absolute least impressive number. He's written an opinion piece rather than reporting, thus making himself a pundit instead of a reporter. It's the difference between Brian Williams and Glen Beck.
I've run Debian derivatives going back to '06 on my laptops -- an HP, a Dell, and a Samsung (this was the point at which I could install Linux and not have to spend the next several hours getting the network card and wireless card to work with my existing hardware). However, I found that Linux consistently cut my laptop power by about 20-30% over Windows XP. Vista was worse, of course, as that had serious power issues on laptops at first, but now Windows 7 performs as good as or better than XP, as near as I can figure. Still, I still find a consistently shorter battery life on Linux on my laptops.
This isn't data of course, and I'm sure others will have had the opposite experience, but it is my experience with my hardware. I never did try any of the kernels which had this power regression, however. I have been working on projects which require PowerShell and Office, so all my recent activity has been in Windows.
If a programmer tells you to use vim or emacs, tell them, "No." These editors are for when you are a better programmer. All you need right now is an editor that lets you put text into a file. We will use gedit because it is simple and the same on all computers.
Mozilla seem to have adopted We-are-graphic-designers-and-so-know-better-than-you-plebs model that turned "Web 2.0" into a steaming pile of shit.
To be fair, Web 2.0 kind of started as a steaming pile of shit. It's just the reason changed from "well, it's new... but just wait!" to "you plebs don't know what you're talking about".
Some enterprise users have internal apps that they need to test, and some of them are upset about such a 'big' change. In reality they shouldn't be looking at version numbers, they should be looking at a list of potential impacts, to make their testing easier.
The point is that most every enterprise IT department treats incrementing the major version number more seriously than minor version numbers, and much more seriously than revision numbers. The de facto standard for version numbers is that major version increments mean major changes which require major testing. That's how everybody else -- short of Google Chrome -- operates. Corporate policies are built around these de facto standards. Abandoning them with no justifiable reason is obnoxious and frustrating.
As far as Google Chrome, they've always operated like this. So it's nothing new. They've always had rolling releases with the major version number representing the stable/beta/dev branches more than anything. Additionally, the software is already corporate-unfriendly due to the fact that it allows non-admins to install so nobody in enterprise IT supports it. It's essentially already carrying a sign that says "NOT FOR BUSINESS". It's getting much better (and appears to have better support than Firefox now) but there hasn't been much press around Chrome for the Enterprise. It's just not on anybody's radar like Firefox is (yet).
Actually, I think pointing out that the West is where the concept of animal welfare (humane societies) as a movement originates, as well as having a common assertion that humanity is the shepherd of all animal species (the Holy Bible). The West, and in particular the English-speaking West, has done more for animal welfare than any other group of peoples in history.
I'd also point out that humans generally consider other humans to be living beings, and all societies treat fellow human beings in pretty awful manners.
If Asa had said, "In my opinion, and I don't speak for Mozilla in general, let's make that clear, I'd rather see the browser focused on the people who don't have a centrally administered environment," this would have been fine. Still candid, but it doesn't bring down the garage door on potential Mozilla investors.
If you think there's even one news agency out there that, given that quote, wouldn't still run with the headline "Firefox Isn't For Business, Mozilla Engineers Say" you're just lying to yourself. At least half the spin comes from the news agencies trying to make a buck with page views, and I don't know anybody who has been quoted by the media who hasn't also been grossly misquoted by the media. I've experienced several instances where the original statement is intelligent and well articulated and the printed quote is garbled to something completely idiotic that reads like something translated by BabelFish. The misquote is page 1 the same day. The correction is days later on page 10.
Reporters are idiots. Think of the "Don't Talk To Police" videos but you haven't got the benefits of the Bill of Rights on your side (quite the opposite). That's why companies publish their own statements: To prevent incorrect and damaging information from being reported. Libel? Not in the case of accidental error, and there's no intent behind incompetence. Besides, it's rather after the fact. It's no good to win a libel suit a year after everybody has stopped using your product.
The truth behind this is entirely dependent upon the school you choose. The CS degree does date back to a time period when most schools did not even own a single computer -- when computing itself was a theoretical science -- but the name endures as it it what people recognize. Certainly, there are an increasing number of Software Engineering and Computer Programming programs at schools, just as there are an increasing number of Information Technology and Computer Information Systems degrees. However, most schools still offer a Computer Science degree, and many still use that term as the one for programming.
"I didn't read it" is not a defense that will often stand up in court
That's true in contract law, but "intentionally deception for gain" is known as fraud. That's actionable civilly as well as criminally. If a large number of employees signed this contract and left, you're looking at a really bad situation for Skype's executives.
Slashdot Mirror
In true Mozilla fashion, I'm sure that will mean "We'll pretend to listen while we continue to do whatever we want"
See? FOSS software really is just as good as commercial closed-source software!
Indeed, cross-breeding generally results in the deficits in each species diminishing and the strengths aggregating. It's a phenomenon known as heterosis or hybrid vigor. The explanation is simple: dominant genes tend to be those which benefit the species (natural selection will tend to eliminate dominant genes which retard the species). Mating with an organism that contains a vast number of completely different genes which gives you a whole new set of dominant genes. Gene's that you didn't have to mutate in your own ancestral lines It's a genetic gold mine.
Rules are made to be broken. Everybody knows that.
That's true to a point, but there's a fundamental difference. Networks are designed to allow different devices which have almost nothing in common to communicate. Keyboards are designed to work with one type of computer and thus build with a specific frame of reference in mind, especially prior to universal device connection technologies (aka, USB). The same is even more true of CPUs, memory, and so on. Additionally, it's important to note that while many older devices speak with Ethernet frames, they speak them over obsolete cable media (coax, older fiber) or they often don't speak TCP or UDP packets instead favoring SPX or NetBIOS. So while your layer 2 technology carries the same name, it really bears little resemblance to Ethernet as it was originally designed.
What does the license tag on the system say? Dimes to dollars it's "Windows 7" or nothing at all. The latter is often used for Vista/7 licenses which were OEM downgraded to XP.
But the license, and therefore the OS you actually bought, is not Windows XP.
I feel bad for Rob.
7 is excellent, a true successor to XP. XP is only still around because of poor people who don't torrent or have ancient hardware, and incompetent management.
Fixed for me. IT people want desperately to move to Windows 7 because of the number of additional management features you get and because basic things like imaging and drivers are handled so much better.
This gadget was released months ago. I've had it on my Windows 7 desktop at work since May at least.
And before all the whargarbl about MS dropping support... Windows XP was released in 2001. No consumer OS has been supported that long, and few enterprise OSs are. Since Windows 7 was released (that was 2 years ago) netbooks and low end systems have shipped with Windows 7 Starter. XP has not been sold on systems for years, and a four years of security support is not bad at all.
Earlier the same year XP was released, Red Hat 7.1 came out. That's the first version of Red Hat to use the 2.4 kernel (7 had the 2.2 kernel). Later in 2001 they released 7.2, which as a new feature offered support for the ext3 file system. One of the major selling points of XP, you may remember, was the fact that it offered full native USB support. It's time to move on, people.
Please phrase your question in the form of an answer.
Yeah, but you're probably a designer or an engineer. Generally, I trust what those people say. It's the executives, lawyers, and (to a somewhat lesser degree) sales and marketing reps I expect to lie through their teeth. That said, I expect the same of any corporate entity. Caveat emptor, indeed.
For any non-trivial function its basically impossible to prove exactly what a computer will do
Bullshit.
If this were remotely true then closed-source applications couldn't be hacked. How exactly do you think you crack and application which requires a software key or has a DRM requirement? How do you think they jailbreak game consoles with saved games? The magic of coincidence? Of course not. The look at the binary code, see what it's doing, disassemble/decompile what they can, and trap all network I/O and file I/O. If you really want to know what WP7 is doing, you can reverse engineer it. If DRM -- which is specifically designed to be difficult to reverse engineer or circumvent -- if DRM can be understood with just binary access, the behavior of an OS on a phone which lacks this design focus should not be that difficult.
Other than being a goodwill gesture (and arguably opening MS up to fraud lawsuits if they are found to be lying), this release doesn't do much at all. However, given what would happen to MS if the code they release here is found to be anything other than what is actually running, I don't believe that they would risk being so stupid as to release anything but the actual source code. MS is in no position in the mobile marketplace to suffer such a gaffe.
I agree. I had quite a habit at one point of downloading games, but now that Steam exists the games are -- in general -- easier to get and use than the hoops you had to jump through for pirated games (which, at the time, were still less annoying that the hoops the retail games made you jump through). Steam is successful because they offer something better than a pirated game. They provide value, and therefore get my money. They also have specials around most major holidays that knock the socks off of anything else. 75% off major games isn't uncommon.
The only games on Steam that piss me off are those which still use GFWL or some other third party DRM in addition to Steam. I do not buy those games, but because there are enough games for me to play otherwise, I don't go pirate them either. Steam cured my penchant for piracy more than any draconian software scheme did. Carrot > stick.
Most of these programs don't install, in the traditional sense. They copy themselves to %userprofile%\AppData. There are ways to protect a system from that but it's not easy to set up and still allow for all the oddball programs your users need.
It's not like Linux stops you from running "rm ~ -rf". You don't need root to run that. This is the equivalent. It doesn't destroy the system. It's not particularly invasive. It does, however, completely mess with user data (toggling the Hidden bit or moving the data is common for these rogue applications, as is automatically running on login). I've never understood why sysadmins think you need root access to damage a computer system. The data is the irreplaceable part, and users - for obvious reasons - have read/write access to their own data.
Just because it's accurate doesn't mean it tells the whole story. It's called "spin". Submitter clearly wants Office 365's SLA to look bad, so he focuses on the absolute least impressive number. He's written an opinion piece rather than reporting, thus making himself a pundit instead of a reporter. It's the difference between Brian Williams and Glen Beck.
I've said it before and I'll say it AGAIN:
Tax the shipping companies and you wouldn't have all these problems!!!
So I send a package via USPS. Where's your tax revenue now?
I've run Debian derivatives going back to '06 on my laptops -- an HP, a Dell, and a Samsung (this was the point at which I could install Linux and not have to spend the next several hours getting the network card and wireless card to work with my existing hardware). However, I found that Linux consistently cut my laptop power by about 20-30% over Windows XP. Vista was worse, of course, as that had serious power issues on laptops at first, but now Windows 7 performs as good as or better than XP, as near as I can figure. Still, I still find a consistently shorter battery life on Linux on my laptops.
This isn't data of course, and I'm sure others will have had the opposite experience, but it is my experience with my hardware. I never did try any of the kernels which had this power regression, however. I have been working on projects which require PowerShell and Office, so all my recent activity has been in Windows.
Neither:
If a programmer tells you to use vim or emacs, tell them, "No." These editors are for when you are a better programmer. All you need right now is an editor that lets you put text into a file. We will use gedit because it is simple and the same on all computers.
Mozilla seem to have adopted We-are-graphic-designers-and-so-know-better-than-you-plebs model that turned "Web 2.0" into a steaming pile of shit.
To be fair, Web 2.0 kind of started as a steaming pile of shit. It's just the reason changed from "well, it's new... but just wait!" to "you plebs don't know what you're talking about".
Some enterprise users have internal apps that they need to test, and some of them are upset about such a 'big' change. In reality they shouldn't be looking at version numbers, they should be looking at a list of potential impacts, to make their testing easier.
The point is that most every enterprise IT department treats incrementing the major version number more seriously than minor version numbers, and much more seriously than revision numbers. The de facto standard for version numbers is that major version increments mean major changes which require major testing. That's how everybody else -- short of Google Chrome -- operates. Corporate policies are built around these de facto standards. Abandoning them with no justifiable reason is obnoxious and frustrating.
As far as Google Chrome, they've always operated like this. So it's nothing new. They've always had rolling releases with the major version number representing the stable/beta/dev branches more than anything. Additionally, the software is already corporate-unfriendly due to the fact that it allows non-admins to install so nobody in enterprise IT supports it. It's essentially already carrying a sign that says "NOT FOR BUSINESS". It's getting much better (and appears to have better support than Firefox now) but there hasn't been much press around Chrome for the Enterprise. It's just not on anybody's radar like Firefox is (yet).
Actually, I think pointing out that the West is where the concept of animal welfare (humane societies) as a movement originates, as well as having a common assertion that humanity is the shepherd of all animal species (the Holy Bible). The West, and in particular the English-speaking West, has done more for animal welfare than any other group of peoples in history.
I'd also point out that humans generally consider other humans to be living beings, and all societies treat fellow human beings in pretty awful manners.
If Asa had said, "In my opinion, and I don't speak for Mozilla in general, let's make that clear, I'd rather see the browser focused on the people who don't have a centrally administered environment," this would have been fine. Still candid, but it doesn't bring down the garage door on potential Mozilla investors.
If you think there's even one news agency out there that, given that quote, wouldn't still run with the headline "Firefox Isn't For Business, Mozilla Engineers Say" you're just lying to yourself. At least half the spin comes from the news agencies trying to make a buck with page views, and I don't know anybody who has been quoted by the media who hasn't also been grossly misquoted by the media. I've experienced several instances where the original statement is intelligent and well articulated and the printed quote is garbled to something completely idiotic that reads like something translated by BabelFish. The misquote is page 1 the same day. The correction is days later on page 10.
Reporters are idiots. Think of the "Don't Talk To Police" videos but you haven't got the benefits of the Bill of Rights on your side (quite the opposite). That's why companies publish their own statements: To prevent incorrect and damaging information from being reported. Libel? Not in the case of accidental error, and there's no intent behind incompetence. Besides, it's rather after the fact. It's no good to win a libel suit a year after everybody has stopped using your product.
I don't like the 3D games on that platform. They always crash in the middle of playing.
Anyways it's all about the premium games for that platform and those cost too much money. Also, there's not enough single player content!
The truth behind this is entirely dependent upon the school you choose. The CS degree does date back to a time period when most schools did not even own a single computer -- when computing itself was a theoretical science -- but the name endures as it it what people recognize. Certainly, there are an increasing number of Software Engineering and Computer Programming programs at schools, just as there are an increasing number of Information Technology and Computer Information Systems degrees. However, most schools still offer a Computer Science degree, and many still use that term as the one for programming.
"I didn't read it" is not a defense that will often stand up in court
That's true in contract law, but "intentionally deception for gain" is known as fraud. That's actionable civilly as well as criminally. If a large number of employees signed this contract and left, you're looking at a really bad situation for Skype's executives.
Since when does buying a TV and a playstation qualify as rich?
About late 2008, by my reckoning.