What he did was design an OS from geeks for geeks. It makes a great server (my preferred server OS as well), and a terrible desktop "for the rest of us".
We gotta face it, the world needs better than Linux for some things, and Windows is that better thing.
This has been tested on isolated colonies of bacteria and viruses and proven to just wipe them all. What if this drug really really just kills everything... and I mean EVERYTHING:)
Because we have noo difficulty poisoning ourselves, and medicines should therefore be a little more selective in their actions:)
How many providers are there in the world? Thousands? Now multiply this by the amount each of them wants for a license (I bet the order is a bulk order, for say at least 1000 mails, you can't pay fraction of the sent for just one mail).
You'll get something that is the cost of businesses that need to send legit mail notification to their customers, such as download information after purchase or tech support replies.
Because if the filters are becoming tighter, you'll just have to pay up or risk your legit e-mail be identified as spam. Damn you Yahoo and AOL.
When things develop normally, thin people stay thin, and fat people become fatter. When a crisis comes, thin people die out of hunger, and fat people just become thin.
A test shows IQ drop in youth! Oh my frigging God, do you know what THE HELL THAT MEANS?!
Nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
Upgrade or keep crashing
on
Buy Vista or Else
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Microsoft designed the 9x with the clear conscience that it's not as stable as its NT platform.
Why was it developed? Compatibility. People wouldn't really drop all their DOS and Windows 3.11 programs, so 9x was the bridge that allowed the smooth transition that ultimately brought the consumer to the NT platform.
The plain logic basically was "we have the better platform, but you want compatibility, so here's a compromise".
Now that 16-bit is a thing of the past, the DOS layer could be removed ultimately resulting in a fully 32-bit protected environment that is Win 2000 and XP. Is Microsoft to blame they sell XP as more stable OS?
Could they have success with any other strategy? I'd say unlikely.
Vista is the next step in improving security and it took a lot of effort to develop this OS, the entire submission is a flamebait: if you were Microsoft, would you work 6 years on a new product and give it for free? Yes, imagine, you have to pay for the updates, and yes the purpose of updating is improved security, new features and modern hardware support.
Microsoft isn't forcing anyone to upgrade. It just does its best to demonstrate the benefits of its latest offering, because this is what software companies do with new releases.
We have this XP driver work fine with all CPU's from AMD and Intel, including Core Solo, but bugging out with Core Duo.
Given it was written before Duo existed, it's not really fair to call it "bug in the driver". Intel and MS are probably to share the blame, with Duo not exactly working as per spec, and XP maybe taking a shortcut or two that happen not to work on the Duo.
This is called incompatibility, not bug. Also even if it's a hardware bug, it's most likely possible to work around with a software patch by Microsoft, just like most of the critical CPU bugs are worked around in software via the compilers.
"There should almost never be any need to know exactly how deep you are nested"
I'm a web developer who works on sites for a living. And I know the difference between "should" and "real world".
Your experience might differ, but to me the heading levels shouldn't necessarily be nested one in another to convey their semantical meaning. For example H1 is of course, the page title, the main topic of discussion on that specific page. If you have a side column with a heading, it won't have H1 heading as well, but H2 at least, because "Other subjects of interest:" may be less telling for the page's contents rather than the page's title.
Due to CSS limitations, you can't always nest your layout properly so that your side column is INSIDE the main section (yes, unless you limit yourself severaly in your layout tools).
This will cause uglyness like excess [section] tags to properly convey the importance of headings: [section][section][h]h2[/h2] side column content [/section][/section].
As for you describing h1-h6 as "ugliness" I urge you to re-read my previous post where I address the point about "pretty code" vs "practical, working code".
Most of the comments here and the other articles on the subject follow the "everything or nothing" mentality.
This is typical when asking for opinions of people not directly affected by the matter. Most of you being outside China, it is easy to claim that you would rather not use Google at all instead of use a reliable service with certain "sensitive" pages filtered.
If you put yourself in the position of a Chinese Internet user, the situation quickly gets different.
Google is a powerful tool, the benefits of which reach far beyond looking up the human rights sites on the Internet (as important as that may be on its own). Depriving China of Google's services is far worse development for Chinese citizens than what Google chose to do.
Also don't forget that it's a lot easier to control a population with overall less reach to information sources. Even if Google filters certain pages, the rest of the information is still an important tool in the fight against censorship and human freedoms.
As China's population gets increasingly better informed and educated, it will be increasingly difficult to control them in the manners we see now or in the past.
So I applaud Bill Gates for taking stand on the matter, never mind if it is to defend Microsoft's own policy or out of principle.
"The Constitution does not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation."
So if I snag someone off a dark alley, rob him and kill him, it's constitutional, since, after all, The Constition does not gurantee the right to travel in dark alleys, you should've been elsewhere.
Well thanks for this precedent devoid of any logic.
XHTML 2.0 is the future, and will always be
on
The Future is XHTML 2.0
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
XHTML 2 is doomed to remain forever "in the bright future" of geeks, where noone cares for compatibility and real technology benefits, but is entirely consumed by semantics and how pretty his code is.
Look at the benefits if XHTML2 and compare it to HTML5, and you'll quickly see why WHATWG was formed.
As HTML5 offers answers to actual problems in web development, and offers backwards compatibility, XHTML2 pointlessly restructures the language, making it harder to read in the process (quick: count the nested sections spread accross pages of text to guess the heading level you're at).
Also while the author dreams about our XHTML2 future, the next major release of the dominant browser on the market (IE7) doesn't even support XHTML 1.0 yet. And this is the browser that most people will use in the next 5-6 years at least.
The author also calls XHTML's semantics better. This is subjective. HTML5 also offers more semantical tags, but according to my practise, it'll be easier to build sites styled with CSS in HTML5 than XHTML2. XHTML2 doesn't have better semantics, it just has different semantics. HTML5 is the one with better semantics IMHO, that build on top of HTML4.
No major browser supports XHTML2, but they support parts of HTML5 (like the canvas tag, invented by Apple's Safari browser, and included in the spec by WHATWG).
I won't even comment the section about XHTML2 "toys" because the subject is serious.
In conclusion I'll say that it's not likely XHTML2 will become a supported standard while most of us are alive, so better concentrate on good HTML4/XHTML1/CSS/JS/SVG/Flash code and applications, and follow the developments at WHATWG.
"This must not have to do with the "War on Terror", because I thought that Google couldnt even notify the press if that was the case."
"War on Porn" is the term you're looking for.. yea.. "War on Porn", described as "defending our country from the modern threat of naked people shot on film".
We'll have to give up some of our civil liberties, such as privacy and personal information, but what the hell, I'd give anything to protect myself from the threat of naked people shot on film.
there's a typo: Intel and HP commit 10 billion to booze and women, that's the title, I have no idea what this "Itanium" thing is and where it came from.
Well I'd say this was the wrong decision. Aibo and Qrio are in everyone's mouth. Everyone wants one, but they are just too darn expensive.
If they could keep developing it, several generations later they could rule the market for price efficient home robots. Still yet they were a great marketing tool.
I wonder what's their strategy, especially that RIGHT NOW, they need all the positive press they could get. Killing the world's favorite pet robots is a bad press coming after bad press.
How come this is so familiar to the announcements of a new iPod.
"Nintendo DS Lite will launch in Japan on the 2nd of March. Nintendo DS Lite will be less than two-thirds the size of the original Nintendo DS and more than 20 percent lighter."
Also they prolly were a step away from calling it DS Nano, but they decided to be "original" instead (picking "LITE", which misleadingly suggests cut down features and price, oh well).
Also see this picture which complements my statement perfectly:
The intervew is interesting and informative, but it's too long, so I took the freedom to shorten it a bit for those who don't have the time:
(1) What has changed, but cut the bullshit this time.
Nash: Sorry, can't cut the bullshit.
(2) How do you manage the secure/user friendly defaults ratio?
Nash: Well, we want it to be secure by default and so on, but marketing says "we want features" and we comply...
(3) Top priority for security in 2006?
Nash: Praying like hell we nail it with Vista.
(4) Did OSS influence the way you think about security in Windows?
Nash: Yea.
(5) What is the basic approach to Microsoft security?
Nash: Too complex to really say, so, I'll instead distract you with some vague statements.
(6) Why add DRM? Also, why not decouple IE?
Nash: We don't have DRM, we have RMS. Which is entirely different. Name that is. As for IE: too late now:P
(7) Do you ever spend time with "average users"? They are all infested with trojans!
Nash: Yea I know, so is my uncle and my grandma.
(8) What about Windows updates to unregistered machines?
Nash: Well, we thought about it long, long time. And basically: if it has nice GUI, then you gotta pay (like AntiSpyware), but if it's just patches, we don't really care, so there.
(9) MSFT employee here. I'm so drunk right now, and I wanna bash MS so much right now, OMG!
Nash: We have your IP dude!
(10) Why no AES in SSL yet?
Nash: Could we add AES in XP like an update? Sure. But then we thought: naaah. But it'll be in Vista so stay tuned.
(11) VISTA users must still be administrators?
Nash: If you wanna run most of the existing software, ya. But we shuffled around some things. Admins now will get nag screens to fill their login info, but on the other hand we made it so user account can now LOOK at the clock!
(12) How is it that OpenBSD is able to be so secure by design?
Nash: Cuz it sucks!
(13) Differences Between Windows & Other Employers?
Nash: They were hardware, we are software. Also at MS we have big budget to reinvent our marketing campaigns, where at DG we didn't.
Disclaimer: I don't claim this to be too accurate or in fact accurate at all, so take it for what is is..
The message from Microsoft: Never visit your grandma without your 512MB flash stick full of patches and antispyware progs.
From the answers it's obvious things are moving in the right direction, but there's also a lot of "I'm making it sound as if security is important, but it's really just everyone trying to save their ass".
You can't expect any company to be honest and just say "ok what the heck: yes we're not superhumans, the code base is huge, lots of bad decisions in the past, & we have lots of smart coders, but some less smart ones, and trying to improve on this whole bunch of stuff while remaining compatible is HELLA hard. But we're trying".
Non-technical users would assume MS is just being monopolistically-lazy about it.
"Global warming does have the word warm in it, but the idea is not that everywhere is going to get hotter; weather is going to get weird. That kind of weather is not normal in that part of India - it adds to the picture of the global climate in crisis, not detracts from it."
Correct though it says 70 years ago the winter in that region was like this again. So this doesn't exactly support the part where the "weather is getting weird". Just apparently there are some peaks every X years in either direction. Maybe they're totally natural.
While I believe human actions affect the global climate, taking the warmest and coldest temperatures from various regions and turning on the alarms is hardly scientific proof of anything.
Slashdot Mirror
No.
Why not? Linus Torvalds did ;)
What he did was design an OS from geeks for geeks. It makes a great server (my preferred server OS as well), and a terrible desktop "for the rest of us".
We gotta face it, the world needs better than Linux for some things, and Windows is that better thing.
This has been tested on isolated colonies of bacteria and viruses and proven to just wipe them all. :)
:)
What if this drug really really just kills everything... and I mean EVERYTHING
Because we have noo difficulty poisoning ourselves, and medicines should therefore be a little more selective in their actions
Time will tell...
How many providers are there in the world? Thousands? Now multiply this by the amount each of them wants for a license (I bet the order is a bulk order, for say at least 1000 mails, you can't pay fraction of the sent for just one mail).
You'll get something that is the cost of businesses that need to send legit mail notification to their customers, such as download information after purchase or tech support replies.
Because if the filters are becoming tighter, you'll just have to pay up or risk your legit e-mail be identified as spam. Damn you Yahoo and AOL.
When things develop normally, thin people stay thin, and fat people become fatter.
:)!
When a crisis comes, thin people die out of hunger, and fat people just become thin.
Respect fat people: they are our future
A test shows IQ drop in youth! Oh my frigging God, do you know what THE HELL THAT MEANS?!
Nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
Microsoft designed the 9x with the clear conscience that it's not as stable as its NT platform.
Why was it developed? Compatibility. People wouldn't really drop all their DOS and Windows 3.11 programs, so 9x was the bridge that allowed the smooth transition that ultimately brought the consumer to the NT platform.
The plain logic basically was "we have the better platform, but you want compatibility, so here's a compromise".
Now that 16-bit is a thing of the past, the DOS layer could be removed ultimately resulting in a fully 32-bit protected environment that is Win 2000 and XP. Is Microsoft to blame they sell XP as more stable OS?
Could they have success with any other strategy? I'd say unlikely.
Vista is the next step in improving security and it took a lot of effort to develop this OS, the entire submission is a flamebait: if you were Microsoft, would you work 6 years on a new product and give it for free? Yes, imagine, you have to pay for the updates, and yes the purpose of updating is improved security, new features and modern hardware support.
Microsoft isn't forcing anyone to upgrade. It just does its best to demonstrate the benefits of its latest offering, because this is what software companies do with new releases.
Now get over it, and stop ranting.
We have this XP driver work fine with all CPU's from AMD and Intel, including Core Solo, but bugging out with Core Duo.
Given it was written before Duo existed, it's not really fair to call it "bug in the driver". Intel and MS are probably to share the blame, with Duo not exactly working as per spec, and XP maybe taking a shortcut or two that happen not to work on the Duo.
This is called incompatibility, not bug. Also even if it's a hardware bug, it's most likely possible to work around with a software patch by Microsoft, just like most of the critical CPU bugs are worked around in software via the compilers.
"There should almost never be any need to know exactly how deep you are nested"
I'm a web developer who works on sites for a living. And I know the difference between "should" and "real world".
Your experience might differ, but to me the heading levels shouldn't necessarily be nested one in another to convey their semantical meaning. For example H1 is of course, the page title, the main topic of discussion on that specific page. If you have a side column with a heading, it won't have H1 heading as well, but H2 at least, because "Other subjects of interest:" may be less telling for the page's contents rather than the page's title.
Due to CSS limitations, you can't always nest your layout properly so that your side column is INSIDE the main section (yes, unless you limit yourself severaly in your layout tools).
This will cause uglyness like excess [section] tags to properly convey the importance of headings: [section][section][h]h2[/h2] side column content [/section][/section].
As for you describing h1-h6 as "ugliness" I urge you to re-read my previous post where I address the point about "pretty code" vs "practical, working code".
Most of the comments here and the other articles on the subject follow the "everything or nothing" mentality.
This is typical when asking for opinions of people not directly affected by the matter. Most of you being outside China, it is easy to claim that you would rather not use Google at all instead of use a reliable service with certain "sensitive" pages filtered.
If you put yourself in the position of a Chinese Internet user, the situation quickly gets different.
Google is a powerful tool, the benefits of which reach far beyond looking up the human rights sites on the Internet (as important as that may be on its own). Depriving China of Google's services is far worse development for Chinese citizens than what Google chose to do.
Also don't forget that it's a lot easier to control a population with overall less reach to information sources. Even if Google filters certain pages, the rest of the information is still an important tool in the fight against censorship and human freedoms.
As China's population gets increasingly better informed and educated, it will be increasingly difficult to control them in the manners we see now or in the past.
So I applaud Bill Gates for taking stand on the matter, never mind if it is to defend Microsoft's own policy or out of principle.
"The Constitution does not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation."
So if I snag someone off a dark alley, rob him and kill him, it's constitutional, since, after all, The Constition does not gurantee the right to travel in dark alleys, you should've been elsewhere.
Well thanks for this precedent devoid of any logic.
XHTML 2 is doomed to remain forever "in the bright future" of geeks, where noone cares for compatibility and real technology benefits, but is entirely consumed by semantics and how pretty his code is.
Look at the benefits if XHTML2 and compare it to HTML5, and you'll quickly see why WHATWG was formed.
As HTML5 offers answers to actual problems in web development, and offers backwards compatibility, XHTML2 pointlessly restructures the language, making it harder to read in the process (quick: count the nested sections spread accross pages of text to guess the heading level you're at).
Also while the author dreams about our XHTML2 future, the next major release of the dominant browser on the market (IE7) doesn't even support XHTML 1.0 yet. And this is the browser that most people will use in the next 5-6 years at least.
The author also calls XHTML's semantics better. This is subjective. HTML5 also offers more semantical tags, but according to my practise, it'll be easier to build sites styled with CSS in HTML5 than XHTML2. XHTML2 doesn't have better semantics, it just has different semantics. HTML5 is the one with better semantics IMHO, that build on top of HTML4.
No major browser supports XHTML2, but they support parts of HTML5 (like the canvas tag, invented by Apple's Safari browser, and included in the spec by WHATWG).
I won't even comment the section about XHTML2 "toys" because the subject is serious.
In conclusion I'll say that it's not likely XHTML2 will become a supported standard while most of us are alive, so better concentrate on good HTML4/XHTML1/CSS/JS/SVG/Flash code and applications, and follow the developments at WHATWG.
"I think it's time for the internet to stop catering to the past."
I think it's time to make way to the young people! Well, who's first to commit suicide?
Hi, since the US governments wants to tap phones randomly, we're switching to Google Talk effective as of tommorow.
It'll be fun to watch them process tons of useless information.
- Osama
"This must not have to do with the "War on Terror", because I thought that Google couldnt even notify the press if that was the case."
"War on Porn" is the term you're looking for.. yea.. "War on Porn", described as "defending our country from the modern threat of naked people shot on film".
We'll have to give up some of our civil liberties, such as privacy and personal information, but what the hell, I'd give anything to protect myself from the threat of naked people shot on film.
Another solution in software: have the BIOS password be required to flash your BIOS.
Not all people have passwords on their BIOS, but that'll teach em...
Sure, but one such guy wouldn't help a whole lot. Thing is there's a steady stream of such guys world-wide that make it all possible :)
"Itanic... Itanic... Itanic."
Flashnews: calling it "Itanic" just become a bit lamer.
there's a typo: Intel and HP commit 10 billion to booze and women, that's the title, I have no idea what this "Itanium" thing is and where it came from.
At first me think, oh good! 365 000 Medical Patents data stolen!
Me think lots of job for patent lawyer.
But then me put glasses on, and read again, me see it's really Patients, not Patents, and noone cares for Patients anyway.
--- 11 PAT3NT POW3R !!! 11 ---
Well I'd say this was the wrong decision. Aibo and Qrio are in everyone's mouth. Everyone wants one, but they are just too darn expensive.
If they could keep developing it, several generations later they could rule the market for price efficient home robots. Still yet they were a great marketing tool.
I wonder what's their strategy, especially that RIGHT NOW, they need all the positive press they could get. Killing the world's favorite pet robots is a bad press coming after bad press.
How come this is so familiar to the announcements of a new iPod.
"Nintendo DS Lite will launch in Japan on the 2nd of March. Nintendo DS Lite will be less than two-thirds the size of the original Nintendo DS and more than 20 percent lighter."
Also they prolly were a step away from calling it DS Nano, but they decided to be "original" instead (picking "LITE", which misleadingly suggests cut down features and price, oh well).
Also see this picture which complements my statement perfectly:
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/n10/news/060126.jpg
iPod for games. Well it's worth trying, that's for sure. Hope it doesn't scratch easily.
The intervew is interesting and informative, but it's too long, so I took the freedom to shorten it a bit for those who don't have the time:
(1) What has changed, but cut the bullshit this time.
Nash: Sorry, can't cut the bullshit.
(2) How do you manage the secure/user friendly defaults ratio?
Nash: Well, we want it to be secure by default and so on, but marketing says "we want features" and we comply...
(3) Top priority for security in 2006?
Nash: Praying like hell we nail it with Vista.
(4) Did OSS influence the way you think about security in Windows?
Nash: Yea.
(5) What is the basic approach to Microsoft security?
Nash: Too complex to really say, so, I'll instead distract you with some vague statements.
(6) Why add DRM? Also, why not decouple IE?
Nash: We don't have DRM, we have RMS. Which is entirely different. Name that is. As for IE: too late now :P
(7) Do you ever spend time with "average users"? They are all infested with trojans!
Nash: Yea I know, so is my uncle and my grandma.
(8) What about Windows updates to unregistered machines?
Nash: Well, we thought about it long, long time. And basically: if it has nice GUI, then you gotta pay (like AntiSpyware), but if it's just patches, we don't really care, so there.
(9) MSFT employee here. I'm so drunk right now, and I wanna bash MS so much right now, OMG!
Nash: We have your IP dude!
(10) Why no AES in SSL yet?
Nash: Could we add AES in XP like an update? Sure. But then we thought: naaah. But it'll be in Vista so stay tuned.
(11) VISTA users must still be administrators?
Nash: If you wanna run most of the existing software, ya. But we shuffled around some things. Admins now will get nag screens to fill their login info, but on the other hand we made it so user account can now LOOK at the clock!
(12) How is it that OpenBSD is able to be so secure by design?
Nash: Cuz it sucks!
(13) Differences Between Windows & Other Employers?
Nash: They were hardware, we are software. Also at MS we have big budget to reinvent our marketing campaigns, where at DG we didn't.
Disclaimer: I don't claim this to be too accurate or in fact accurate at all, so take it for what is is..
The message from Microsoft: Never visit your grandma without your 512MB flash stick full of patches and antispyware progs.
From the answers it's obvious things are moving in the right direction, but there's also a lot of "I'm making it sound as if security is important, but it's really just everyone trying to save their ass".
You can't expect any company to be honest and just say "ok what the heck: yes we're not superhumans, the code base is huge, lots of bad decisions in the past, & we have lots of smart coders, but some less smart ones, and trying to improve on this whole bunch of stuff while remaining compatible is HELLA hard. But we're trying".
Non-technical users would assume MS is just being monopolistically-lazy about it.
"Global warming does have the word warm in it, but the idea is not that everywhere is going to get hotter; weather is going to get weird. That kind of weather is not normal in that part of India - it adds to the picture of the global climate in crisis, not detracts from it."
Correct though it says 70 years ago the winter in that region was like this again. So this doesn't exactly support the part where the "weather is getting weird". Just apparently there are some peaks every X years in either direction. Maybe they're totally natural.
While I believe human actions affect the global climate, taking the warmest and coldest temperatures from various regions and turning on the alarms is hardly scientific proof of anything.