I don't want to start a flame war, but maybe there's more going on under the hood than at first glance. For example, imagine a Windows 2000 Professional box and a Windows XP Professional box with the regular Windows Classic theme. They both look a little different, and they both act pretty much the same, but they're quite different.
Maybe a better example for the/. crowd would have been Linux and *BSD with X/KDE one each, heh.
Microsoft should fix their operating system to ask for a password any time a program is installed, registry settings are changed, key files are modified, etc..
If you've used a Linux machine, you'd know not to run anything as root unless necessary. On Windows machines, running as an Administrator is basically the same thing. Why ask for a password when you already have COMPLETE SYSTEM-WIDE ACCESS? Fortunately, the ability to create resticted users is already there, and has been there since at least Windows 2000!
...every linux distro should just use FAT to make sure windows can be dualbooted and read the linux data.
Contrarily, I think each should have some way of reading the others' data, whether or not the required filsystem drivers are first- or third-party. Linux already has good read-only support for NTFS (and presumed safe write support, to an extent), and there's an EXT2 driver available for Windows. Having both can allow at least a decent amount of compatability.
Don't know about having an encrypted disk, though. I vote against it, regardless of whether my vote is moot.
I think this indeed is a case in point for my argument. Why do people NOT switch from IIS to Apache? TCO. Not only do they have to change over all of their IIS running machines (may just be one, may be more than one), but they have to learn an entirely new product. Apache isn't all point-and-click, either (from my standpoint, anyway; I set up apache on a server without X on it), so they have to contend with administrative incompetence until they understand it. It costs dollars to train those people. On the flip side, Microsoft software is easier to set up, but the dollars are lost in licensing for use of the software in the first place.
I'm not FOR IIS, nor am I against it. I'm just saying that it's sometimes difficult for someone/some group to make such a big switch.
I'm no programmer. I'm no insider. I'm just a jumble power user. What I CAN say is that Windows as a dominant OS has brought us one thing: consistency. With Windows, you pretty much have one code base, one API, etc. With Linux, you have the Linux kernel in common. Everything else is up to chance. Most big software packages (IIRC) have multiple versions for different distros of Linux, whereas with Windows, it's just one base: win32.
I'm not bashing Linux (I use it all the time), nor am I praising Windows. I'm just offering up another side to this.
Sure, it sounds neat: watch things in 3D at the movie theater (or "cinema," I guess). But, the question is: how long until something like this gets ported to the home sector? Someone won't want to pay $10 to get into the theater, and companies like DirecTV (not necessarily DirecTV) will pay the companies that run the 3D cameras to upload the stream to their feeds, and offer the package to home users. I guess the best way to gauge that is to look at Pay-Per-View vs. box offices.
Isn't that was SkyNet is? A big botnet? A self-aware one, anyway.
Re:The best way to secure the root account...
on
Sudo vs. Root
·
· Score: 1
Despite the fact that it was probably intended to be funny...after the things I've done, I'd vouch for this.
Re:The Monad shell won't be in Vista
on
Sudo vs. Root
·
· Score: 1
In the past, Windows was centered around one user, which meant the user was root. This was always the case until Windows NT came along. Unfortunately, it means most legacy software will run incorrectly (if at all) under Restricted User. Hell, even the Windows 2000 userpasswords control panel tells you that users in the Users group can use the computer, but may have problems using legacy software (which I assume means software designed for Windows NT will run correctly with normal user credentials).
Having once saw a Discovery Channel program (hence making me an expert*), I learned that one contributing factor to intelligence was the fact that we have a moon. Unfortunately, it's been a while since I saw it, so I don't know WHY this is anymore. Based on this, wouldn't it make it difficult for intelligent life to develop on a planet without a moon, much less a moon itself?
For my senior project, I was going to make a two-way WiFi link between to Soekris boards running pebble Linux (I took the GED in December instead so I could start college in January, so my plan never came to fruition). From where I live, it would take probably just 5 or 6 access points to make a working relay between Sacramento, CA and Reno, NV. I live in a -great- location, where I can shoot a signal on just about anywhere over Auburn, CA, or quite a bit of central-northern Sierra mountains. I'd gladly pool money into this kind of thing.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought it was humans that were the disease of the planet...
I don't want to start a flame war, but maybe there's more going on under the hood than at first glance. For example, imagine a Windows 2000 Professional box and a Windows XP Professional box with the regular Windows Classic theme. They both look a little different, and they both act pretty much the same, but they're quite different.
/. crowd would have been Linux and *BSD with X/KDE one each, heh.
Maybe a better example for the
Maybe I'm just ignorant, but the article is about someone's own Da Vinci-like code, not THE DaVinci code, as the title/summary suggests.
Another fine Slashdot entry?
Don't you mean until his 18th birthday? Then again, I don't remember this person's handle being zerocool.
That means either Steve Jobs is free, or Alexander the Great has an infinite number of arms.
Microsoft should fix their operating system to ask for a password any time a program is installed, registry settings are changed, key files are modified, etc..
If you've used a Linux machine, you'd know not to run anything as root unless necessary. On Windows machines, running as an Administrator is basically the same thing. Why ask for a password when you already have COMPLETE SYSTEM-WIDE ACCESS? Fortunately, the ability to create resticted users is already there, and has been there since at least Windows 2000!
Didn't that sort of thing used to happen on old-time radio? More Ovaltine, please!
Perhaps you've never seen one of THESE then!
Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.
How appropriate for an internet TV appliance article.
...every linux distro should just use FAT to make sure windows can be dualbooted and read the linux data.
Contrarily, I think each should have some way of reading the others' data, whether or not the required filsystem drivers are first- or third-party. Linux already has good read-only support for NTFS (and presumed safe write support, to an extent), and there's an EXT2 driver available for Windows. Having both can allow at least a decent amount of compatability.
Don't know about having an encrypted disk, though. I vote against it, regardless of whether my vote is moot.
Do these not count as IDs? I think here in California an ID is required.
I think this indeed is a case in point for my argument. Why do people NOT switch from IIS to Apache? TCO. Not only do they have to change over all of their IIS running machines (may just be one, may be more than one), but they have to learn an entirely new product. Apache isn't all point-and-click, either (from my standpoint, anyway; I set up apache on a server without X on it), so they have to contend with administrative incompetence until they understand it. It costs dollars to train those people. On the flip side, Microsoft software is easier to set up, but the dollars are lost in licensing for use of the software in the first place.
I'm not FOR IIS, nor am I against it. I'm just saying that it's sometimes difficult for someone/some group to make such a big switch.
Sounds like a new archive type.
DAR: Distributed Archive.
Know your enemy and yourself? Or was it as yourself?
I'm no programmer. I'm no insider. I'm just a jumble power user. What I CAN say is that Windows as a dominant OS has brought us one thing: consistency. With Windows, you pretty much have one code base, one API, etc. With Linux, you have the Linux kernel in common. Everything else is up to chance. Most big software packages (IIRC) have multiple versions for different distros of Linux, whereas with Windows, it's just one base: win32.
I'm not bashing Linux (I use it all the time), nor am I praising Windows. I'm just offering up another side to this.
So uh, what's the other 1%?
Sure, it sounds neat: watch things in 3D at the movie theater (or "cinema," I guess). But, the question is: how long until something like this gets ported to the home sector? Someone won't want to pay $10 to get into the theater, and companies like DirecTV (not necessarily DirecTV) will pay the companies that run the 3D cameras to upload the stream to their feeds, and offer the package to home users. I guess the best way to gauge that is to look at Pay-Per-View vs. box offices.
Spoilers.
Isn't that was SkyNet is? A big botnet? A self-aware one, anyway.
Despite the fact that it was probably intended to be funny...after the things I've done, I'd vouch for this.
In the past, Windows was centered around one user, which meant the user was root. This was always the case until Windows NT came along. Unfortunately, it means most legacy software will run incorrectly (if at all) under Restricted User. Hell, even the Windows 2000 userpasswords control panel tells you that users in the Users group can use the computer, but may have problems using legacy software (which I assume means software designed for Windows NT will run correctly with normal user credentials).
a closer look reveals a picture that is not so clear.
;)
Zoom out then.
...many catch phrases from the show have caught on in American culture
;)
It shows in your signature.
Futurama, not Ren & Stimpy. ;)
Having once saw a Discovery Channel program (hence making me an expert*), I learned that one contributing factor to intelligence was the fact that we have a moon. Unfortunately, it's been a while since I saw it, so I don't know WHY this is anymore. Based on this, wouldn't it make it difficult for intelligent life to develop on a planet without a moon, much less a moon itself?
* Sarcasm.
For my senior project, I was going to make a two-way WiFi link between to Soekris boards running pebble Linux (I took the GED in December instead so I could start college in January, so my plan never came to fruition). From where I live, it would take probably just 5 or 6 access points to make a working relay between Sacramento, CA and Reno, NV. I live in a -great- location, where I can shoot a signal on just about anywhere over Auburn, CA, or quite a bit of central-northern Sierra mountains. I'd gladly pool money into this kind of thing.