The Firefox 2.0 history panel is damn near useless to me. It offers the convenient option to sort by date and site, but apparently one would never need to search within those results, because typing in the search box clears that filter.
Stating that Linux and OS X are gaining market share doesn't make it true. I've provided two independent sources (a statistics firm and an open-source-centric developer site) that both contradict you; non-Microsoft OS are losing ground.
On the desktop, Windows Vista is competing with Windows XP, while Windows 2000 takes third place. OS X and Linux are nowhere. You're deluded.
Firefox has made impressive progress yes, but you've unwittingly spotted the problem for OS X and Linux; a browser is a browser, but they are nothing like Windows and the competing camps will never be interested in making their offerings more like Windows - and Ihttp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=572679&cid=23645147# Preview believe that's the only possible route to success.
Microsoft is doing just fine and dandy and I can't see that changing for another decade at least.
It'll be close to the amount gained by Vista minus the amount lost by Windows 2000 and OS X. Use your brain. Adding Windows XP would have likely made the other trends too flat to be useful. Of course, you could have visited the original source to see that XP had 80.89%-84.48%.
That graph may or may not be of more use, but I don't believe it gives the impression you think it does. Increase the range and you'll see Microsoft have recovered from far worse down-turns (if indeed that's what's happening - it's certainly not clear cut) in the past.
What's Windows 2000 doing with a whopping 4.5%? I don't know. Maybe 4 to 5 out of every 100 computers still uses Windows 2000. Even more users of W3schools (yes, a site aimed at developers) used Windows 2000 at the same time as the graph was published.
XP isn't on the graph because more than 5% of people use it. I think.
Microsoft wasn't charged with abusing its monopoly because they only have a small portion of the market
You can search for other web statistics and they all pretty much match up. Welcome to the realisation that you've been misled by Slashdot.
Question: did you not detect even the remotest hint of humor the GP's post? I wouldn't call it humour, but yes, I did identify his claim that it's difficult to choose between a gaming rig and an open source graphics card as sarcasm.
The choice is indeed an easy one, because it doesn't exist. Prospective buyers would only ever be interested in one or the other; they don't serve the same purpose.
I'm not sure which choice you think should be obvious, but do you really think this graphics card is aimed at the gaming market, and if so, what gave you that idea?
It's not the same product. If all you require when purchasing a graphics card is the hardware, good luck to you.
Tech ARP claims that the Quadro is much more profitable, but I wonder how they (and presumably you) can reach that conclusion. If the price premium is apparently justified by the additional software cost, then the profit margins are directly tied to development costs and number of cards sold. Without that information, you're both speculating.
You do realize that it's just as easy to have put a virus into an add-on for a proprietary browser as well, right? Explain to me exactly how for no other reason than being closed-source does that attack vector get closed for software like IE or Opera? Oh, you mean it doesn't? Yeah, you're just spreading FUD. It's not quite the same thing if Microsoft or Opera Software don't distribute third party extensions themselves (I'm not sure whether or not they do). One can't expect them to control the actions of totally independent entities. Mozilla presumably had every opportunity (regardless of the resources required) to review the source before making it available for download.
I would assume internet traffic is spied on at the ISP rather than at the endpoint. Think about it; a whitelist approach to allowing access would render wiretaps impossible if what you are saying were correct.
Microsoft is so big that one part of the company that provides poor service is, for all intents and and purposes, a separate entity. I do admit that their billing.microsoft.com portal sucks hard - at least for a mere consumer like me, but there are countless companies with atrocious billing departments that don't garner the hate Microsoft does.
Fraud? That's a new one on me. Specifics?
I think businesses that don't lie (to varying degrees) are in the minority.
You seem to be implying that is satisfactory, but those are exactly the times I'm talking about. I do like the way the Ubuntu forums are administered in that newbies are accommodated and not mocked for failing to spend hours trawling through Google results - that does seem to make them unusual in the Linux world. I've only ever had one problem with Windows that I was unable to quickly solve by myself and that was a minor issue with hibernation (which I don't use).
The first issue I encountered with Ubuntu was the fact that it wouldn't allow me to select a sensible resolution without editing xorg.conf - despite the fact that my monitor and video card was identified correctly by name. The next issue I came across happened minutes later and was even more serious - the title bars and borders of all windows disappeared so you could not move or resize them. This is not all that uncommon.
I need to use to a lot of Windows software and WINE just doesn't cut it, not to mention (as I said elsewhere in this thread) the fact that hacks like WINE are the exact type of unnecessary tinkering people doing real work don't need.
Another problem is editing grub.conf to change the default boot order, but this is only marginally better on Windows. I would however expect a higher percentage of Linux users to be utilising more than one OS.
This mess concluded my latest attempt (it was the shortest trial yet - progress indeed) to use Linux as a desktop OS. I still use RHEL on my dedicated game/web server although every distribution insisting on having their own commands is very annoying when searching for a particular solution.
You don't know anything about what I use, you don't know what tasks I was talking about and you neglected to say what it is you do. How do I use Visual Studio on Linux/Mac? How do I use Photoshop on Linux? How do I use AutoCAD on Linux/Mac? These are all leading industry standard software suits (VS arguably less so) that just can't run on Linux without the exact unnecessary tinkering we're talking about.
I didn't wish to be drawn into a discussion about Linux vs. Windows and maybe I was unwise to have ever mentioned it.
If you don't hate Microsoft itself, I clearly wasn't referring to you. I've not heard that reason before, so you're definitely not part of the majority I spoke of either.
You also speak of using your OS as a hobby, which again, does not contradict my point about using Linux professionally. I think this article is pretty much spot on and most who are disagree may be in denial. I'm not willing to listen to anyone who says Microsoft's software and actions are judged objectively and by the same standard as their competitors - at least here on Slashdot.
For example, having to edit a handful of documented registry keys to re-enable old file formats in Office 2007 (ignoring the rights and wrongs of disabling them in the first place) is "ludicrous" and "impractical for 99% of the user-base", but much more complex command line actions are routinely required even on Ubuntu. I suggest that those who claim exclusive use of the GUI is sufficient are content with the default software and settings.
You're reading something that wasn't there. To make one single irrational decision in no way reflect one's mental state. When anyone talks about the reasons behind others' decision making, it's a given that it can only be opinion - nobody "knows" what other people are thinking. I didn't think this needed to be explicitly stated.
Slashdot Mirror
The Firefox 2.0 history panel is damn near useless to me. It offers the convenient option to sort by date and site, but apparently one would never need to search within those results, because typing in the search box clears that filter.
Why exactly would they be adding (managed) C++ support when they have already done so?
I can see 75% of Slashdot talking out of their ass on this one.
Not if keeping the old product costs you money (in support and security patches) and brings no sales (because everyone already has it).
Stating that Linux and OS X are gaining market share doesn't make it true. I've provided two independent sources (a statistics firm and an open-source-centric developer site) that both contradict you; non-Microsoft OS are losing ground.
On the desktop, Windows Vista is competing with Windows XP, while Windows 2000 takes third place. OS X and Linux are nowhere. You're deluded.
Firefox has made impressive progress yes, but you've unwittingly spotted the problem for OS X and Linux; a browser is a browser, but they are nothing like Windows and the competing camps will never be interested in making their offerings more like Windows - and Ihttp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=572679&cid=23645147#
Preview believe that's the only possible route to success.
Microsoft is doing just fine and dandy and I can't see that changing for another decade at least.
You don't have to call them. It only takes one or two mouse clicks over the internet.
It'll be close to the amount gained by Vista minus the amount lost by Windows 2000 and OS X. Use your brain. Adding Windows XP would have likely made the other trends too flat to be useful. Of course, you could have visited the original source to see that XP had 80.89%-84.48%.
That graph may or may not be of more use, but I don't believe it gives the impression you think it does. Increase the range and you'll see Microsoft have recovered from far worse down-turns (if indeed that's what's happening - it's certainly not clear cut) in the past.
What's Windows 2000 doing with a whopping 4.5%? I don't know. Maybe 4 to 5 out of every 100 computers still uses Windows 2000. Even more users of W3schools (yes, a site aimed at developers) used Windows 2000 at the same time as the graph was published.
XP isn't on the graph because more than 5% of people use it. I think.
Microsoft wasn't charged with abusing its monopoly because they only have a small portion of the market
You can search for other web statistics and they all pretty much match up. Welcome to the realisation that you've been misled by Slashdot.
Office 2007 is actually very successful. Don't allow yourself to be manipulated by the Slashdot anti-Microsoft sentiments.
I also found the assertion of the GP hilarious. Do you interpret this graph as showing Microsoft's impending doom? If you do, you need glasses.
Is it common for Americans to use UK spelling in a primarily British forum?
Yes, they do. The Solo and Maestro logos are clearly shown on their UK home page. I also happen to use my Solo card with PayPal just fine.
When he says "recently", he means 6th August 2004; the release of Windows XP SP2.
Clearly the GP meant "you do not have the right to what you did not create unless the creator willingly grants you that right".
1. X pays Y to do Z
2. Z is completed badly
3. X reviews Y's performance
4. Go to 1
I can't seem to understand why you think X is free from blame.
Would you care to be specific about what makes Microsoft's marketing more misleading than marketing in general?
The choice is indeed an easy one, because it doesn't exist. Prospective buyers would only ever be interested in one or the other; they don't serve the same purpose.
I'm not sure which choice you think should be obvious, but do you really think this graphics card is aimed at the gaming market, and if so, what gave you that idea?
It's not the same product. If all you require when purchasing a graphics card is the hardware, good luck to you.
Tech ARP claims that the Quadro is much more profitable, but I wonder how they (and presumably you) can reach that conclusion. If the price premium is apparently justified by the additional software cost, then the profit margins are directly tied to development costs and number of cards sold. Without that information, you're both speculating.
I would say it has more to do with not wanting to tread in a stinking pile of shit.
I would assume internet traffic is spied on at the ISP rather than at the endpoint. Think about it; a whitelist approach to allowing access would render wiretaps impossible if what you are saying were correct.
Microsoft is so big that one part of the company that provides poor service is, for all intents and and purposes, a separate entity. I do admit that their billing.microsoft.com portal sucks hard - at least for a mere consumer like me, but there are countless companies with atrocious billing departments that don't garner the hate Microsoft does.
Fraud? That's a new one on me. Specifics?
I think businesses that don't lie (to varying degrees) are in the minority.
You seem to be implying that is satisfactory, but those are exactly the times I'm talking about. I do like the way the Ubuntu forums are administered in that newbies are accommodated and not mocked for failing to spend hours trawling through Google results - that does seem to make them unusual in the Linux world. I've only ever had one problem with Windows that I was unable to quickly solve by myself and that was a minor issue with hibernation (which I don't use).
The first issue I encountered with Ubuntu was the fact that it wouldn't allow me to select a sensible resolution without editing xorg.conf - despite the fact that my monitor and video card was identified correctly by name. The next issue I came across happened minutes later and was even more serious - the title bars and borders of all windows disappeared so you could not move or resize them. This is not all that uncommon.
I need to use to a lot of Windows software and WINE just doesn't cut it, not to mention (as I said elsewhere in this thread) the fact that hacks like WINE are the exact type of unnecessary tinkering people doing real work don't need.
Another problem is editing grub.conf to change the default boot order, but this is only marginally better on Windows. I would however expect a higher percentage of Linux users to be utilising more than one OS.
This mess concluded my latest attempt (it was the shortest trial yet - progress indeed) to use Linux as a desktop OS. I still use RHEL on my dedicated game/web server although every distribution insisting on having their own commands is very annoying when searching for a particular solution.
You don't know anything about what I use, you don't know what tasks I was talking about and you neglected to say what it is you do. How do I use Visual Studio on Linux/Mac? How do I use Photoshop on Linux? How do I use AutoCAD on Linux/Mac? These are all leading industry standard software suits (VS arguably less so) that just can't run on Linux without the exact unnecessary tinkering we're talking about.
I didn't wish to be drawn into a discussion about Linux vs. Windows and maybe I was unwise to have ever mentioned it.
If you don't hate Microsoft itself, I clearly wasn't referring to you. I've not heard that reason before, so you're definitely not part of the majority I spoke of either.
You also speak of using your OS as a hobby, which again, does not contradict my point about using Linux professionally. I think this article is pretty much spot on and most who are disagree may be in denial. I'm not willing to listen to anyone who says Microsoft's software and actions are judged objectively and by the same standard as their competitors - at least here on Slashdot.
For example, having to edit a handful of documented registry keys to re-enable old file formats in Office 2007 (ignoring the rights and wrongs of disabling them in the first place) is "ludicrous" and "impractical for 99% of the user-base", but much more complex command line actions are routinely required even on Ubuntu. I suggest that those who claim exclusive use of the GUI is sufficient are content with the default software and settings.
You're reading something that wasn't there. To make one single irrational decision in no way reflect one's mental state. When anyone talks about the reasons behind others' decision making, it's a given that it can only be opinion - nobody "knows" what other people are thinking. I didn't think this needed to be explicitly stated.