Should be much more secure as the 1st time you connect to any new network (wireless or otherwise), Vista assumes it's a hostile network by default, and coaxing it into opening any ports at all on the new interface requires admin privileges. If you don't, everything inbound is locked down.
So, in theory, if you just "plug in a vista RTM machine", it should be watertight. Start opening ports though, and it might be a different story.
new UAC, program caching, standards compliant browser
From what I've seen from builds so far, UAC is getting modified in that you'll be able to say "Don't bug me again for for X minutes"...program caching is in Vista called SuperFetch...works nicely if you have the RAM (even if people tend to complain it "uses my memory", ironically)...and IE8 is supposed to be standards compliant by default. So, out of that list, 2 out of 3 are already here if you don't use IE, and UAC prompts are rare if you don't use software from 10 years ago.
Same happened to me in.... while waiting for the machine to authorise â50 withdrawal, I was drumming the screen just in that bored way you do and managed to get the OS/2 task manager up (didn't realise it was a touch screen), crashing the terminal program and losing my card in the machine as a result.
I've not really used OS/2, but someone just with my fingers you can lose window focus if you're not careful.
I think actually, more open-source game ENGINE's would improve this....
Most of the industry, at least for 3d shooters tend to use either the unreal engine or an ID variant...would make sense to open-source them maybe?
The thing commercial entities do well at is the body of a game; intricate level design, high detail textures, voice acting, movement capturing and so on...and because there big $$$ to be made if it's done right. The thing the open-source community do well is the optimised, techie low-level programming that supports it all. Combine the two and you could be onto a winner maybe?
Yes, this is an over-simplification I know, but it's just a thought.
I like the idea of, where appropriate, having real life ads in games....it A, makes it easier to relate to, and B, could pay for the game anyway...if done right, for the right game-types.
The games where free won't work though, are the single player games only. Bioshock for example; excellent game, very well choreographed, excellent "acting" and attention to detail, and absolutely no reason to ever be connected to the internet to play it. Free just won't work for games like Bioshock.
And one more thing; they need to make it easier to PAY for the game than to pirate it. All the steam games for example are incredibly easy to pay for; there's no disc; games are kept invisibly patched, and even your save games are (or will be, rather) kept online. Goto a new machine, log into steam, and voila; you can download it all again free and resume where you left off. Most games however are just easier to pirate than they are to legitimately own. Shame.
Similar here: plenty of people will purposefully make stupid anti-MS statements, irrelevant of if they believe it or not or even care whose fault it is, in the hopes that if done sufficiently, it'll sink into the public mindset.
Careful now, with such logic and level-headedness like that you could end up in twitter's journal and everything:)
Amen. I've got to say, I've seen many many boxes keel over with ZoneAlarm installed; it does nasty things with kernel hooks and so forth that doesn't bear thinking about. There are some decent software firewalls out there, but ZoneAlarm isn't one of them.
In conclusion: More PCs were shipped, anti-piracy was more effective, and like you point out, online services we're "barely significant", but being such a small input into gross profit so far, barely registers either - so worry not, MS jobs are secure for quite some time to come.
They will look at how you're performing your primary job. All that other stuff you do, they probably won't even know about, and if they do they won't care.
Actually, my point is more to volunteer for tasks outside your primary job-scope. Employers like flexibility, and the cross over is very relevant. For example: You're an asp.net programmer - learning the intricacies of IIS admin through some kind of additional SCM role will benefit your coding skills, broaden your skill-set in general AND dig your claws into the project that little bit more.
Let's assume most people in BestBuy that have computers already have Windows. How are they going to use Ubuntu exactly? Last time I checked, most Linux distros can use free space to sit alongside Windows or blitz it completely and sit on top. Most machines don't have any free space....
This isn't a troll, I'll be real interested how many people accidentally pick the latter option without realising the consequences. This should fly with geeks, but if too many joe sixpacks end up bombing their partitions accidentally, it could backfire?
I.e, don't be just a programmer; learn server management too (if nothing else, you should know how servers work to help you be a better programmer), and get involved in areas outside your job scope as much as possible. That way they can't containerise you easily and therefore know fully the impact of you not being there any more. Not to mention it's more interesting to have a broader skill-set.
I know what they are doing. Now, why don't you show me that this is the most effective allocation of these resources. And in what way is Jeff Raikes qualified to make decisions about public health policy in third world nations?
Ok, so you're nit-picking how they spend the cash. Fair enough; I doubt, as I've said before, it's going to be perfect, but still there's billions of dollars going into the neediest of countries nevertheless...
So, how again do people have a choice if "nothing out of the box provides that experience"?
And what do you think are the reasons that "nothing out of the box provides that experience"? Microsoft's unique insights and inventiveness in groupware technologies? Don't make me laugh.
Actually, it's one area Microsoft really has created something that there's been very little before. Perhaps the closest thing has been Lotus Notes, but really, I doubt you'll find anything that did/does what MOSS/Office does today. Credit where credit's due. Maybe one day there'll be an OSS ecosystem just as effective, but not right now there isn't and that isn't through Microsoft "destroying" whatever there was before, because there wasn't anything before really. You could argue Office is only dominant because MS killed WordPerfect and friends; Windows, because OS/2 was obliterated by Gates, but actually some MS stuff is popular, really because they did it better than anyone else.
1. Learn basics; enough to buy beers, etc 2. Go live in foreign country 3. Put advert out for "language interchange" 4. Reply to females only 5. Get them drunk (it helps with learning don't-you-know) 6, 7....at some point... Profit!
Even works for geeks! Trust me I know!
Nothing really
on
Head First C#
·
· Score: 3, Informative
It's very windows orientated, but that's about all I find wrong with it. Not a problem if you're never leaving Windows land - I find it an excellent language. If you are going outside of Windows, pick a more suitable tool for the job or use mono.
No, I am saying that, looking at their portfolio, I do not believe that the Gates Foundation actually does much good. Again, that's because of their portfolio, not because of their name or their accounting practices.
You can be sure that the vast majority of Microsoft customers never even evaluated an alternative and don't even know that there is one. That's not "choice". And even people who are aware of alternatives will stick with Microsoft, not because it's better, but because they worry about file incompatibilities. Doubtlessly, there are many users that are reasonably satisfied with Microsoft products, but that is not the same as saying that they made a choice; they never had a choice because Microsoft killed it.
There's more choice now than there's ever been, and in fact, some of the choices are making real inroads into Microsoft territory. FireFox is of course the prime example. OpenOffice too provides much of what a lot of users would use in MS Office, but ultimately things like Office provide a lot the alternatives just don't have. Look at the Office/Microsoft Office Server System ecosystem for just one example - there's nothing that out of the box provides that experience. And i'll leave the Exchange & Communication server additions out too, for now. While you might think people haven't looked for alternatives, sometimes it makes sense to go Microsoft. Other times not (low powered PCs comes to mind).
My point is always "use what makes sense" - use your head not your heart. And yeah, it's not always MS stuff I'll be the first to admit.
They could even make it more secure. But that would risk alienating a huge chunk of traditional Windows users (who still want their old stuff to work, will be confused by a modular design, and who *hate* security popups asking for a password every time they install something).
That's exactly what vista did and is doing now. The 10 year old apps that used to spray files into system32 don't work (at least, not without irritations), and that's precisely why users aren't so keen on Vista if at all. The way i see it, Vista has been the necessary medicine; years in the coming. Right now, the Windows ecosystem is going through the awkward adolescence period of having to be secure & responsible, and it's hurting. It won't always be so bad...
and their source-code is available for review at least @ http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/default.mspx... which 10 years ago would've been unthinkable; but yeah, although it's a far cry from the GPL, is still hugely better than it was.
There's some serious trolling going on in this site; people, amazingly seem to thing donating billions to charity is a bad thing compared to GPL freedoms. Are zealots really going to go so low as to try and piss on a charitable campaign because it was done by a guy who made a stack off selling his own code (I'll accept, the business tactics could've been more ethical)?
Moderations such as "overrated" to the parent really make me lose faith in humanity sometimes. There's nothing "overrated" about someone saying "I receive Bills money, and without it the work I do for charity would be much harder." unless of course you want to censor this opinion.
If you look for bad in anything you'll find it; and that's exactly what some of the zealots are out to do at any cost.
RMS to me has proved to me that some OSS zealots are about blind belief at all costs, and that no line is too low to cross.
A damned shame too; OSS itself isn't bad, it's just some of the idiots associated with it that suck.
Slashdot Mirror
Should be much more secure as the 1st time you connect to any new network (wireless or otherwise), Vista assumes it's a hostile network by default, and coaxing it into opening any ports at all on the new interface requires admin privileges. If you don't, everything inbound is locked down.
So, in theory, if you just "plug in a vista RTM machine", it should be watertight. Start opening ports though, and it might be a different story.
You can bundle all the patches & service-packs you want into a slipstream image and install everything at the same time.
Otherwise, there's WSUS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Server_Update_Services).
(Not that I disagree XP was horribly insecure when it came out)
new UAC, program caching, standards compliant browser
From what I've seen from builds so far, UAC is getting modified in that you'll be able to say "Don't bug me again for for X minutes"...program caching is in Vista called SuperFetch...works nicely if you have the RAM (even if people tend to complain it "uses my memory", ironically)...and IE8 is supposed to be standards compliant by default. So, out of that list, 2 out of 3 are already here if you don't use IE, and UAC prompts are rare if you don't use software from 10 years ago.
of course, is when the laptop makes it to the car, just not in the car.
Same happened to me in.... while waiting for the machine to authorise â50 withdrawal, I was drumming the screen just in that bored way you do and managed to get the OS/2 task manager up (didn't realise it was a touch screen), crashing the terminal program and losing my card in the machine as a result.
I've not really used OS/2, but someone just with my fingers you can lose window focus if you're not careful.
Plus you could back it up & restore it in like 2 minutes from DOS.
Yay for retro OS's!
I think actually, more open-source game ENGINE's would improve this....
Most of the industry, at least for 3d shooters tend to use either the unreal engine or an ID variant...would make sense to open-source them maybe?
The thing commercial entities do well at is the body of a game; intricate level design, high detail textures, voice acting, movement capturing and so on...and because there big $$$ to be made if it's done right.
The thing the open-source community do well is the optimised, techie low-level programming that supports it all. Combine the two and you could be onto a winner maybe?
Yes, this is an over-simplification I know, but it's just a thought.
I like the idea of, where appropriate, having real life ads in games....it A, makes it easier to relate to, and B, could pay for the game anyway...if done right, for the right game-types.
The games where free won't work though, are the single player games only. Bioshock for example; excellent game, very well choreographed, excellent "acting" and attention to detail, and absolutely no reason to ever be connected to the internet to play it. Free just won't work for games like Bioshock.
And one more thing; they need to make it easier to PAY for the game than to pirate it. All the steam games for example are incredibly easy to pay for; there's no disc; games are kept invisibly patched, and even your save games are (or will be, rather) kept online. Goto a new machine, log into steam, and voila; you can download it all again free and resume where you left off.
Most games however are just easier to pirate than they are to legitimately own. Shame.
Similar here: plenty of people will purposefully make stupid anti-MS statements, irrelevant of if they believe it or not or even care whose fault it is, in the hopes that if done sufficiently, it'll sink into the public mindset.
Careful now, with such logic and level-headedness like that you could end up in twitter's journal and everything :)
Amen. I've got to say, I've seen many many boxes keel over with ZoneAlarm installed; it does nasty things with kernel hooks and so forth that doesn't bear thinking about. There are some decent software firewalls out there, but ZoneAlarm isn't one of them.
This should clear up any queries - http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/corporate/microsoft_q1_2008_by_the_numbers.html
In conclusion: More PCs were shipped, anti-piracy was more effective, and like you point out, online services we're "barely significant", but being such a small input into gross profit so far, barely registers either - so worry not, MS jobs are secure for quite some time to come.
You dropped this - http://www.instantrimshot.com/
Yup. Over indeed it is, as their crashing stock and sales shows......
Wait a minute....
They will look at how you're performing your primary job. All that other stuff you do, they probably won't even know about, and if they do they won't care.
Actually, my point is more to volunteer for tasks outside your primary job-scope. Employers like flexibility, and the cross over is very relevant. For example: You're an asp.net programmer - learning the intricacies of IIS admin through some kind of additional SCM role will benefit your coding skills, broaden your skill-set in general AND dig your claws into the project that little bit more.
Let's assume most people in BestBuy that have computers already have Windows. How are they going to use Ubuntu exactly? Last time I checked, most Linux distros can use free space to sit alongside Windows or blitz it completely and sit on top. Most machines don't have any free space....
This isn't a troll, I'll be real interested how many people accidentally pick the latter option without realising the consequences.
This should fly with geeks, but if too many joe sixpacks end up bombing their partitions accidentally, it could backfire?
I.e, don't be just a programmer; learn server management too (if nothing else, you should know how servers work to help you be a better programmer), and get involved in areas outside your job scope as much as possible. That way they can't containerise you easily and therefore know fully the impact of you not being there any more. Not to mention it's more interesting to have a broader skill-set.
Well, i'll finish with a quote I see as fitting to the whole "OMG! M$ sukz0rs!" seeing as this conversation is going nowhere fast...
"Money talks, bullshit walks".
When serious money is involved, it comes down to more than "They don't know any better" I'm afraid.
I know what they are doing. Now, why don't you show me that this is the most effective allocation of these resources. And in what way is Jeff Raikes qualified to make decisions about public health policy in third world nations?
Ok, so you're nit-picking how they spend the cash. Fair enough; I doubt, as I've said before, it's going to be perfect, but still there's billions of dollars going into the neediest of countries nevertheless...
So, how again do people have a choice if "nothing out of the box provides that experience"?
And what do you think are the reasons that "nothing out of the box provides that experience"? Microsoft's unique insights and inventiveness in groupware technologies? Don't make me laugh.
Actually, it's one area Microsoft really has created something that there's been very little before. Perhaps the closest thing has been Lotus Notes, but really, I doubt you'll find anything that did/does what MOSS/Office does today. Credit where credit's due. Maybe one day there'll be an OSS ecosystem just as effective, but not right now there isn't and that isn't through Microsoft "destroying" whatever there was before, because there wasn't anything before really. You could argue Office is only dominant because MS killed WordPerfect and friends; Windows, because OS/2 was obliterated by Gates, but actually some MS stuff is popular, really because they did it better than anyone else.
Yeah the thing is they all speak English there. Not a single English speaker I know in Holland has ever learnt Dutch. Belgium too, to a lesser extent.
Steps to guaranteed happiness:
1. Learn basics; enough to buy beers, etc
2. Go live in foreign country
3. Put advert out for "language interchange"
4. Reply to females only
5. Get them drunk (it helps with learning don't-you-know)
6, 7....at some point... Profit!
Even works for geeks! Trust me I know!
It's very windows orientated, but that's about all I find wrong with it. Not a problem if you're never leaving Windows land - I find it an excellent language. If you are going outside of Windows, pick a more suitable tool for the job or use mono.
No, I am saying that, looking at their portfolio, I do not believe that the Gates Foundation actually does much good. Again, that's because of their portfolio, not because of their name or their accounting practices.
Ok, take a look at this link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_and_Melinda_Gates_Foundation#Activities and tell me again it's ineffective. Fair enough, be critical, and doubtless it's never going to be perfect, but nevertheless it's not going to do more harm than good, as RMS suggests.
You can be sure that the vast majority of Microsoft customers never even evaluated an alternative and don't even know that there is one. That's not "choice". And even people who are aware of alternatives will stick with Microsoft, not because it's better, but because they worry about file incompatibilities. Doubtlessly, there are many users that are reasonably satisfied with Microsoft products, but that is not the same as saying that they made a choice; they never had a choice because Microsoft killed it.
There's more choice now than there's ever been, and in fact, some of the choices are making real inroads into Microsoft territory. FireFox is of course the prime example. OpenOffice too provides much of what a lot of users would use in MS Office, but ultimately things like Office provide a lot the alternatives just don't have. Look at the Office/Microsoft Office Server System ecosystem for just one example - there's nothing that out of the box provides that experience. And i'll leave the Exchange & Communication server additions out too, for now. While you might think people haven't looked for alternatives, sometimes it makes sense to go Microsoft. Other times not (low powered PCs comes to mind).
My point is always "use what makes sense" - use your head not your heart. And yeah, it's not always MS stuff I'll be the first to admit.
They could even make it more secure. But that would risk alienating a huge chunk of traditional Windows users (who still want their old stuff to work, will be confused by a modular design, and who *hate* security popups asking for a password every time they install something).
That's exactly what vista did and is doing now. The 10 year old apps that used to spray files into system32 don't work (at least, not without irritations), and that's precisely why users aren't so keen on Vista if at all.
The way i see it, Vista has been the necessary medicine; years in the coming. Right now, the Windows ecosystem is going through the awkward adolescence period of having to be secure & responsible, and it's hurting. It won't always be so bad...
There's a fair amount of information on MS protocols and standards on MSDN - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc216514.aspx
and their source-code is available for review at least @ http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/default.mspx ... which 10 years ago would've been unthinkable; but yeah, although it's a far cry from the GPL, is still hugely better than it was.
There's some serious trolling going on in this site; people, amazingly seem to thing donating billions to charity is a bad thing compared to GPL freedoms. Are zealots really going to go so low as to try and piss on a charitable campaign because it was done by a guy who made a stack off selling his own code (I'll accept, the business tactics could've been more ethical)?
Moderations such as "overrated" to the parent really make me lose faith in humanity sometimes.
There's nothing "overrated" about someone saying "I receive Bills money, and without it the work I do for charity would be much harder." unless of course you want to censor this opinion.
If you look for bad in anything you'll find it; and that's exactly what some of the zealots are out to do at any cost.
RMS to me has proved to me that some OSS zealots are about blind belief at all costs, and that no line is too low to cross.
A damned shame too; OSS itself isn't bad, it's just some of the idiots associated with it that suck.