For the record, neither am I. Fact is I think MS does some things exceptionally well. They just usually benefit MS more than anybody else. As for me, I mainly want to avoid an upgrade treadmill. Charge me $50/year for supported XP and I would probably go with that.
Paragraph 4/5/6/7/8: in 6 months...everyone stopped complaining
If someone steps on your toes, you grumble and then stop.
This time, with Windows 10, things are fundamentally different.
Paragraph 9: Thank you for your kind offer. Many people suck, for sure.
Paragraph 10:
You know what is happening with it this time? Even FEWER people are downloading the distros.
Just as you say my comment was "bigger than me", your data is now "bigger than you". IOW, not meaningful.
Analogy-wise, when someone punches you into unconsciousness, you do things a whole heck of a lot differently. You *don't* whine about it. Maybe you don't say a word to anybody about it. But, if you are a techie, and it is a technical KO, you route around it. That may take time, energy, money. But it happens, as sure as the rain falls.
When there is a small hiccup between people, the "bigger" one apologizes or otherwise attempts to bridge the gap, and you move on. When there is a large hiccup, a completely different dynamic kicks in.
Paragraph 13:
Look at the adoption rates, they're about where they should be.
Since this has been a remarkably civil conversation, I'll avoid a "forced adoption" rant.
Paragraph 14:
There's no up against the wall
When there is an up-against-the-wall, please tell me who is left to report on it? That has not been scared into silence that is.
IOW, when the threat changes, the response changes (as I said earlier).
Paragraph 17:
XP was a fine OS. I imagine that you could keep it reasonably secure.. You know what you're doing, I'm sure you can do it.
I think computer threats from XP-and-earlier WindowsOSes are over-estimated by a factor or 10 to 100. And the threats from newer, more NSA-friendly OSes, is 10 to 100 times worse than we think.
Paragraph 18:
I'd not recommend a novice take that approach
Agreed. And this is why the uptick is "as expected". Most are going with WinX for now.
I bet a bunch of people would pay. Say, $30/year?
Yup, pretty much the same figure I tossed out there.
Paragraph 19:
That said, Windows Vista is actually a good OS
I would call it "acceptable". I have one Vista el-cheapo workhorse that I've stripped the services out of and air-gapped. Will run fine for years, I'm sure. But I certainly wouldn't *want* to use it (and spend only minutes per week using it). All about them messing up the Z-order...
Paragraph 20:
Windows 7 is excellent
It would have been acceptable to me if they hadn't back-ported their Nazi Gestapo Stasi NSA 1984 crap to it. Even when you say you don't want any of it.
You know, maybe this is the analogy that will work to explain Windows 10. It is a tech holocaust.
Paragraph 23:
I'm not the most articulate
I think you have been most articulate. And patient.
This could be the most civilized extended conversation I've ever had on/.
the OS desktop market will not change more than 10% by 01/01/2017
Ok, that is a pretty daring wager. I'm not the betting type, but w
As another commenter humorously pointed out, the military is not worried about the telemetry because that information just comes back to them anyway. So this article is not about the military adopting Windows 10. That is merely the latest trigger for Slashdot commenters to say whatever pops into their mind about the newest Orwellian measures from Microsoft.
As to what people are doing, it is funny that you think you know, based on help desk requests. In my dozen plus years with XP, I've never submitted a help desk request.
As to what Slashdotters (and other equally tech-savvy people) are doing, this is where the real action is. And do you think you are going to be the first to know about their action(s), before they ship product?
All I want is an XP clone. I'm not even interested in Windows 7. I want Windows FOM (Free-Of-Microsoft). So I have a serious interest in ReactOS. No, it doesn't appear ready yet, but then my XP machines are still going strong.
Then there is DOSBox, etc.
Dear Microsoft,
Couple words of advice: never piss off a techie.
Regards,
As to what I, and others, are doing...it is more like reversion. Stepping backward to older versions of Windows, run in a VM, and hosted on whatever OS. Or, of course, moving to an entirely different OS.
I wrote that first post 10 years ago. On XP. I haven't changed operating system since. I had even bought, two years back, a 10GB RAM i3770 Win8 machine. It literally sat beside me for a year. Then, a year back, I gave it away to a family member. It (Win8) is simply not as good as what I am using now (XP).
The latest telemetry/Orwellian spying was witnessed by someone unaffected.
If you can explain how I am furthering Microsoft's goals, I'd love to hear it.
Slashdot is a lot less active now than in the past. Threads have one-third the comments these days.
As to Windows 10, it is more painfully obvious how perfectly villainous it is. It is one thing to ship a performance dog (Vista), or an interface nightmare (Windows 8) but this is a whole new level of creepy. And that was before it was back-ported to otherwise decent (Win 7) or half-decent (Win 8 with a suitable shell, or Win 8.1) operating systems.
This is Windows up-against-the-wall-ready-aim-fire-now-go-get-the-others.
You want an energy efficient shaver? Get one that requires a cord to work. Will also last several times longer. Same gain is available with a lawn mower, if you don't mind cord wrangling (which I don't).
The only device I use regularly* that needs batteries is the TV remote. And that goes for years betwix replacements.
* - I have a cell phone, but don't use it. It is for emergencies, like a couple of quarters in my pocket used to be.
Michelson-Morley, a negative (i.e. non) result, did nothing whatsoever.
Einstein didn't copy: Science is almost always a collaborative process with people building on top of each other.
When you don't give credit, as Einstein was famous for not doing, then it is copying. Had Einstein given the proper amount of credit, he wouldn't have the unreasonable levels of adulation he has today. Which was the OP's point.
As to the papers you list: Einstein was always a contributor, and a big factor in general. But the papers you cite are invisibly small compared to SR/GR. For anyone else, those papers would be worth framing. But Einstein basically fizzled in his later years. The big stuff he was working on -- trying to define space/fields/ether, and trying to unify the e/m & gravity -- produced zilch.
Einstein copied from/built off of many others, prompting some physicists to give the credit for relativity to Lorentz and others? Yes
Einstein was weak enough, mathematically, that he needed Hilbert (and even some interns) to help him with the math? Yes
Einstein did little after SR/GR? Yes
Even worse, in my books, is that SR discarding the ether was the single most damaging thing to happen in physics in the last 110 years.
GR saying the ether can be there, but is not needed, did not fully reverse the gaff of SR.
Einstein then vacillated about the ether for the rest of his life, coming out both for and against numerous versions of the ether, before finally settling on a name-changed ether.
Bottom line? Einstein played both sides of the ether fence, and played games with words, rather than advancing physics and further than SR/GR.
On a non-physics level, I like Einstein. He was a thinker, philosophical and a pacifist. And he didn't wear socks...something I haven't been able to give up.
I think you know incredibly little about me, and certainly not enough to state that I "expect to find the solution somewhere else".
Your latest post amounts to an Ad hominem thrust, followed by a deflecting "we're all different". While carefully avoiding further discussion of the uselessness of the peer-review process.
A small group of anyone you care to pick has the potential of being right, and of being wrong. In ways that are, frankly, impossible to predict.
A large group is quite likely wrong in its majority views, and certainly wrong in a greater number of ways. But it is also more likely to contain one or more correct views.
It is like comparing the +5 comments to every comment. Personally, I prefer to browse at -1.
I'm curious, do you value the opinions of an extremely small group of peers over the opinions of an extremely large group of people (i.e. the world)? If you do, why do you?
The advertisers need to understand that they really can't win this war
Well, not in this manner, no.
I remember when Wired used to provide stories. Many were long and exactly the same as their print magazine.
Today, Wired has sold out to the "must please Google's absurd 'mobile-friendly' standard". Translation: You must have a bunch of giant graphics (with little or no text) first. Or else Google will down-mod you. Actual text content is worthless, so cut that back. Here, have some white bread.
So the Wired of today is worthless, and won't be missed.
As to why this move by Wired will fail? People share links with others. Let's say, hypothetically, that you have subscribed to Wired or turned off your ad block. Wired serves you an article. You say "Gee, this article is good. Me gonna share it." You share it. People email bomb you to complain about how they can't load the page. There is no rinse and repeat.
I'm curious also if that one core was even running at full tilt. Processors these days sleep by default. So is this test one of "boot up and run some cpu measuring utility" or did it at least run at 100% utilization for a while?
Similarly, there may be a long straight stretch which is divided into two passing zones, one for each direction. If you have an oncoming vehicle at the start of the stretch there would often be plenty of room to complete a pass after it goes by, but now you only have half of your 'passing allowed' zone left.
This is not how it works. There are two common passing scenarios.
(1) Passing is provided every so many miles, with signs telling you when it is coming up and when you must "keep right except to pass". Routine, easy, safe. No biggie.
(2) Regarding the solid double yellow line and when it changes to say you can pass, this is based on road conditions. When you see passing dashes for one direction, that is because it is safe for them to do so. When it is ok for both directions to pass, the line with be a single dashed yellow line.
In summary, passing on the highway is easy (in the U.S.) Drivers are much better here than in Canada (where speed limits are typically artificially low, and rarely change as you drive) All in all, the American driving experience is great. The only limit is the speed limit (up to 70 in this state and depending on road conditions) and how much gas you can afford (not been this cheap in a decade or more).
There is a lot more than click rate behind advertising.
Click rate is coarse, binary. Advertisers would like to know how long we stared at a product. How many people typed the name/keywords of the ad into YouTube. How long after a product was advertised do we retain information about the product. And a thousand other things.
So, turning all that around, if we (slashdotters) provide some of that, we don't have to necessarily "click on a link" to give advertisers something they want.
We (/.ers) love to comment and critique and reference. I think we need to address advertising like no one else ever has. And in so doing, help change the game. Because the game is broken, like shrapnel, thanks to the ongoing arms race.
Ads delivering malware, and sites serving white space instead of content? This can't continue...
I use Ghostery, a 16MB hosts file and no Javascript unless I feel like it. Forbes balked. I turned the JS on. Forbes balked. I went with no hosts file. Forbes balked.
Forbes went in my hosts file.
Slashdot should set up an ad group, with a couple of "outside of Slashdot or the ad community" members, to try to come up with something. I'd volunteer to help out. The thing is, Slashdot has the best comment+moderation+meta moderation system on the Internet. And I'm sure they could pull off something equally impressive regarding ads. If they lead, rather than followed.
If you give people the ability to vote on if an comment is good or not, all it does is punish all but the most popular (and highest reward) comments (Eg a WoW comment might be favored over a comment for toothpaste, which might be favored over StartsWithABang's blog).
Welcome to Slashdot.
Clearly, the ad system should be modelled after the comment/moderation system. With subscriptions allowing a user to increase their ad karma. Enough bucks, and person #1 get no ads. Some bucks, and some ad voting, works for person #2. Person #3 pays nothing, sees the most ads, but can still vote given ads up or down. Metamoderation happens by tallying up our individual votes. "Sorry, Clearasil, but no one wants to look at your ads any more. Goodbye."
As soon as you throw out "80%...90%...allscripts...any attempt", you have missed the point. You are trying to order advertisers around. This has zero chance for success -- for you, and especially for advertisers.
Like it or not, you are in a three-way, and there simply has to be something for everyone.
Slashdot Mirror
For the record, neither am I. Fact is I think MS does some things exceptionally well. They just usually benefit MS more than anybody else. As for me, I mainly want to avoid an upgrade treadmill. Charge me $50/year for supported XP and I would probably go with that.
Paragraph 4/5/6/7/8: in 6 months...everyone stopped complaining
If someone steps on your toes, you grumble and then stop.
This time, with Windows 10, things are fundamentally different.
Paragraph 9: Thank you for your kind offer. Many people suck, for sure.
Paragraph 10:
Just as you say my comment was "bigger than me", your data is now "bigger than you". IOW, not meaningful.
Analogy-wise, when someone punches you into unconsciousness, you do things a whole heck of a lot differently. You *don't* whine about it. Maybe you don't say a word to anybody about it. But, if you are a techie, and it is a technical KO, you route around it. That may take time, energy, money. But it happens, as sure as the rain falls.
When there is a small hiccup between people, the "bigger" one apologizes or otherwise attempts to bridge the gap, and you move on. When there is a large hiccup, a completely different dynamic kicks in.
Paragraph 13:
Since this has been a remarkably civil conversation, I'll avoid a "forced adoption" rant.
Paragraph 14:
When there is an up-against-the-wall, please tell me who is left to report on it? That has not been scared into silence that is.
IOW, when the threat changes, the response changes (as I said earlier).
Paragraph 17:
I think computer threats from XP-and-earlier WindowsOSes are over-estimated by a factor or 10 to 100. And the threats from newer, more NSA-friendly OSes, is 10 to 100 times worse than we think.
Paragraph 18:
Agreed. And this is why the uptick is "as expected". Most are going with WinX for now.
Yup, pretty much the same figure I tossed out there.
Paragraph 19:
I would call it "acceptable". I have one Vista el-cheapo workhorse that I've stripped the services out of and air-gapped. Will run fine for years, I'm sure. But I certainly wouldn't *want* to use it (and spend only minutes per week using it). All about them messing up the Z-order...
Paragraph 20:
It would have been acceptable to me if they hadn't back-ported their Nazi Gestapo Stasi NSA 1984 crap to it. Even when you say you don't want any of it.
You know, maybe this is the analogy that will work to explain Windows 10. It is a tech holocaust.
Paragraph 23:
I think you have been most articulate. And patient.
This could be the most civilized extended conversation I've ever had on /.
Ok, that is a pretty daring wager. I'm not the betting type, but w
As another commenter humorously pointed out, the military is not worried about the telemetry because that information just comes back to them anyway. So this article is not about the military adopting Windows 10. That is merely the latest trigger for Slashdot commenters to say whatever pops into their mind about the newest Orwellian measures from Microsoft.
As to what people are doing, it is funny that you think you know, based on help desk requests. In my dozen plus years with XP, I've never submitted a help desk request.
As to what Slashdotters (and other equally tech-savvy people) are doing, this is where the real action is. And do you think you are going to be the first to know about their action(s), before they ship product?
All I want is an XP clone. I'm not even interested in Windows 7. I want Windows FOM (Free-Of-Microsoft). So I have a serious interest in ReactOS. No, it doesn't appear ready yet, but then my XP machines are still going strong.
Then there is DOSBox, etc.
Dear Microsoft,
Couple words of advice: never piss off a techie.
Regards,
I'm sure you meant the royal "we", but you've aimed your remark at someone who has kept a record of his.
My first comment on XP.
My second, albeit AC.
As to what I, and others, are doing...it is more like reversion. Stepping backward to older versions of Windows, run in a VM, and hosted on whatever OS. Or, of course, moving to an entirely different OS.
I wrote that first post 10 years ago. On XP. I haven't changed operating system since. I had even bought, two years back, a 10GB RAM i3770 Win8 machine. It literally sat beside me for a year. Then, a year back, I gave it away to a family member. It (Win8) is simply not as good as what I am using now (XP).
The latest telemetry/Orwellian spying was witnessed by someone unaffected.
If you can explain how I am furthering Microsoft's goals, I'd love to hear it.
Slashdot is a lot less active now than in the past. Threads have one-third the comments these days.
As to Windows 10, it is more painfully obvious how perfectly villainous it is. It is one thing to ship a performance dog (Vista), or an interface nightmare (Windows 8) but this is a whole new level of creepy. And that was before it was back-ported to otherwise decent (Win 7) or half-decent (Win 8 with a suitable shell, or Win 8.1) operating systems.
This is Windows up-against-the-wall-ready-aim-fire-now-go-get-the-others.
You want an energy efficient shaver? Get one that requires a cord to work. Will also last several times longer. Same gain is available with a lawn mower, if you don't mind cord wrangling (which I don't).
The only device I use regularly* that needs batteries is the TV remote. And that goes for years betwix replacements.
* - I have a cell phone, but don't use it. It is for emergencies, like a couple of quarters in my pocket used to be.
Well said, and I learned a word for the day.
Let the autopilot handle Take-Offs & Landings
This is exactly why this is being trialed...to soften people up to communism.
Imagine what comes next after we collectively embrace communism.
<img src="84_mac_ad_in_r3v3rs3.jpg"
When you don't give credit, as Einstein was famous for not doing, then it is copying. Had Einstein given the proper amount of credit, he wouldn't have the unreasonable levels of adulation he has today. Which was the OP's point.
As to the papers you list: Einstein was always a contributor, and a big factor in general. But the papers you cite are invisibly small compared to SR/GR. For anyone else, those papers would be worth framing. But Einstein basically fizzled in his later years. The big stuff he was working on -- trying to define space/fields/ether, and trying to unify the e/m & gravity -- produced zilch.
I somewhat agree with you.
Einstein copied from/built off of many others, prompting some physicists to give the credit for relativity to Lorentz and others? Yes
Einstein was weak enough, mathematically, that he needed Hilbert (and even some interns) to help him with the math? Yes
Einstein did little after SR/GR? Yes
Even worse, in my books, is that SR discarding the ether was the single most damaging thing to happen in physics in the last 110 years.
GR saying the ether can be there, but is not needed, did not fully reverse the gaff of SR.
Einstein then vacillated about the ether for the rest of his life, coming out both for and against numerous versions of the ether, before finally settling on a name-changed ether.
Bottom line? Einstein played both sides of the ether fence, and played games with words, rather than advancing physics and further than SR/GR.
On a non-physics level, I like Einstein. He was a thinker, philosophical and a pacifist. And he didn't wear socks...something I haven't been able to give up.
Install it under her seat.
I think you know incredibly little about me, and certainly not enough to state that I "expect to find the solution somewhere else".
Your latest post amounts to an Ad hominem thrust, followed by a deflecting "we're all different". While carefully avoiding further discussion of the uselessness of the peer-review process.
Well played, sir.
I think the answer is not so simple.
A small group of anyone you care to pick has the potential of being right, and of being wrong. In ways that are, frankly, impossible to predict.
A large group is quite likely wrong in its majority views, and certainly wrong in a greater number of ways. But it is also more likely to contain one or more correct views.
It is like comparing the +5 comments to every comment. Personally, I prefer to browse at -1.
I'm curious, do you value the opinions of an extremely small group of peers over the opinions of an extremely large group of people (i.e. the world)? If you do, why do you?
If you really are looking for something different...
c:\>wusa
'wusa' is not recognized...
Well, not in this manner, no.
I remember when Wired used to provide stories. Many were long and exactly the same as their print magazine.
Today, Wired has sold out to the "must please Google's absurd 'mobile-friendly' standard". Translation: You must have a bunch of giant graphics (with little or no text) first. Or else Google will down-mod you. Actual text content is worthless, so cut that back. Here, have some white bread.
So the Wired of today is worthless, and won't be missed.
As to why this move by Wired will fail? People share links with others. Let's say, hypothetically, that you have subscribed to Wired or turned off your ad block. Wired serves you an article. You say "Gee, this article is good. Me gonna share it." You share it. People email bomb you to complain about how they can't load the page. There is no rinse and repeat.
I'm curious also if that one core was even running at full tilt. Processors these days sleep by default. So is this test one of "boot up and run some cpu measuring utility" or did it at least run at 100% utilization for a while?
These days, with GPS tech, they should record exactly where line changes start and then, when repainting, this becomes the reference.
The more consistent roads are -- within themselves, and one road compared to another within a state, and country -- the safer they are.
This is not how it works. There are two common passing scenarios.
(1) Passing is provided every so many miles, with signs telling you when it is coming up and when you must "keep right except to pass". Routine, easy, safe. No biggie.
(2) Regarding the solid double yellow line and when it changes to say you can pass, this is based on road conditions. When you see passing dashes for one direction, that is because it is safe for them to do so. When it is ok for both directions to pass, the line with be a single dashed yellow line.
In summary, passing on the highway is easy (in the U.S.) Drivers are much better here than in Canada (where speed limits are typically artificially low, and rarely change as you drive) All in all, the American driving experience is great. The only limit is the speed limit (up to 70 in this state and depending on road conditions) and how much gas you can afford (not been this cheap in a decade or more).
There is a lot more than click rate behind advertising.
Click rate is coarse, binary. Advertisers would like to know how long we stared at a product. How many people typed the name/keywords of the ad into YouTube. How long after a product was advertised do we retain information about the product. And a thousand other things.
So, turning all that around, if we (slashdotters) provide some of that, we don't have to necessarily "click on a link" to give advertisers something they want.
We (/.ers) love to comment and critique and reference. I think we need to address advertising like no one else ever has. And in so doing, help change the game. Because the game is broken, like shrapnel, thanks to the ongoing arms race.
Ads delivering malware, and sites serving white space instead of content? This can't continue...
This a transcript (and MP3 audio) here
I use Ghostery, a 16MB hosts file and no Javascript unless I feel like it. Forbes balked. I turned the JS on. Forbes balked. I went with no hosts file. Forbes balked. Forbes went in my hosts file.
Slashdot should set up an ad group, with a couple of "outside of Slashdot or the ad community" members, to try to come up with something. I'd volunteer to help out. The thing is, Slashdot has the best comment+moderation+meta moderation system on the Internet. And I'm sure they could pull off something equally impressive regarding ads. If they lead, rather than followed.
If you give people the ability to vote on if an comment is good or not, all it does is punish all but the most popular (and highest reward) comments (Eg a WoW comment might be favored over a comment for toothpaste, which might be favored over StartsWithABang's blog).
Welcome to Slashdot.
Clearly, the ad system should be modelled after the comment/moderation system. With subscriptions allowing a user to increase their ad karma. Enough bucks, and person #1 get no ads. Some bucks, and some ad voting, works for person #2. Person #3 pays nothing, sees the most ads, but can still vote given ads up or down. Metamoderation happens by tallying up our individual votes. "Sorry, Clearasil, but no one wants to look at your ads any more. Goodbye."
As soon as you throw out "80%...90%...allscripts...any attempt", you have missed the point. You are trying to order advertisers around. This has zero chance for success -- for you, and especially for advertisers.
Like it or not, you are in a three-way, and there simply has to be something for everyone.