Google is publicly berating Microsoft for their supposedly-inadequate security, yet their own products face similar complaints.
Of course you can't blame them for wanting to be as secure as possible, and they chose the route of ditching Microsoft rather than helping fix the problems that they seem to care so much about. If they think they can do better, then why don't they help fix them?
The way IE integrates with the OS varies between releases. In XP and earlier, items such as Windows Update and Windows help are running on IE. Since Vista, these have been control panel applets instead, giving malicious code exectued in IE no power over it.
Users using another browser wouldn't be able to execute code that affects these components, but if some malicious code successfully attacks an IE user, it could potentially attack other parts of the system where IE is integrated (and to which IE has some form of access), and then execute code to potentially gain 'control' of a system.
This "remote code execution" usually isn't a hack that a script kiddie could run to gain access to your files, but often it's enough for hackers just to be able to redirect your browser (to fake online banking sites) or even just cause your PC to visit a site. Thousands of compromised PCs visiting a website a thousand times a second each is your basic DDoS attack.
Since when are anti-trust actions based on law? I got the impression it was a case of suing as your competitors as often as possible to try and catch them out on some semantic technicality...
Actually it probably means advert placements for those demographics that skip ads become cheaper, whilst those that actually watch adverts become more expensive. Not a massive shift, but expect to see the cheap slots becoming less sophisticated, and open to ever-smaller companies, which could be a good thing.
Alternatively, maybe the ad-breaks for the skipping-demographics will get shorter, to discourage people from skipping, so ensuring they watch the bother to watch 1 advert that is on (rather than skipping all 20).
It's paying for the research, development, and possibly deployment of a new and improved lock.
Well it's paying for the scoping, designing, building, testing, deployment and testing of the shop's security system, which would include a better lock, alarm and bars on the windows. And lots of coffee for the builders.
I'm a Microsoft intern in the UK, and unfortunately we don't get any of this royalty treatment. Free coke though, which again didn't turn out to be anywhere near as exciting as we expected!
I got myself an AM2 processor and mobo last week, and have been using Windows XP x64 since then. Driver support is a really big hassle for any nonstandard hardware. All my usual stuff works fine, but my phone and webcam refuse to work. Software has also been an issue, with me so far being completely unable to find a working DVD application, and I've resorted to using a Virtual PC with XP x86 on.
Whilst I can see the benefits of 64-bit computing, the industry seems wholly unprepared for the move they're encouraging us to do. So long as you have 2gig of RAM or under, stick with XP Pro.
True, there is a difference between them, but they do look and feel similar. Yes in San Andreas you can swim, fly helicopters, choose clothing, hairstyles, tattoos, get fit, go more places and it does have a better-quality graphics system, but it still feels similar to GTA3.
Don't forget that GTAIII and San Andreas were built for the same console - the Playstation 2. If they're running off the same hardware, then they can only optimize code and rewrite things to make them work swifter. The PS3 and the Xbox 360 are totally new pieces of kit, with a load more power than their predecessors. This is the change that warrants a totally new type of gameplay.
In GTAIV, the way the game works will probably be different. GTA1 had purely driving missions, run over crates for pickups, get your car repainted, and drive into people, other cars, and the rivers. In GTA3 you could get into some buildings, there was a wider range of missions, and (try to) fly the dodo. In Vice City, helicopters came in, and more interiors. San Andreas brought all the above 'fashion' features (gimmiks) and loads more things to do (stealing, jetpack, jumpjet) and a massive city.
What's gonna be different about GTAIV? Well we may have a different style of missions altogether, instead of visiting random people and them sending you on missions you may have to go make business contacts and use your brain a bit more.
I'm not sure, but I can assure you the numbering system matches up to the BIG changes.
Actually their numbering system is still inline. GTA3, Vice City and San Andreas were all part of the GTA3 trilogy, kept the same game engine, design and features (just added onto it). Liberty City Stories was a prequel to GTA3, but still using the same engine, just a little extra thing they did.
Slashdot Mirror
correlation != causation
Just take everything with a pinch of salt, don't be misled, and then these studies might be more useful to you.
You're right - it's not irony, it's hypocrisy.
Google is publicly berating Microsoft for their supposedly-inadequate security, yet their own products face similar complaints.
Of course you can't blame them for wanting to be as secure as possible, and they chose the route of ditching Microsoft rather than helping fix the problems that they seem to care so much about. If they think they can do better, then why don't they help fix them?
The way IE integrates with the OS varies between releases. In XP and earlier, items such as Windows Update and Windows help are running on IE. Since Vista, these have been control panel applets instead, giving malicious code exectued in IE no power over it.
Users using another browser wouldn't be able to execute code that affects these components, but if some malicious code successfully attacks an IE user, it could potentially attack other parts of the system where IE is integrated (and to which IE has some form of access), and then execute code to potentially gain 'control' of a system.
This "remote code execution" usually isn't a hack that a script kiddie could run to gain access to your files, but often it's enough for hackers just to be able to redirect your browser (to fake online banking sites) or even just cause your PC to visit a site. Thousands of compromised PCs visiting a website a thousand times a second each is your basic DDoS attack.
Since when are anti-trust actions based on law? I got the impression it was a case of suing as your competitors as often as possible to try and catch them out on some semantic technicality...
Or it could just be a straightforward doppler effect with it moving away from the receiver?
You could just visit the browser ballot page directly.
For reference, the browsers listed are IE, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera, Flock, FlashPeak, K-Meleon, Avant, Maxthon, Sleipnir & GreenBrowser
Actually it probably means advert placements for those demographics that skip ads become cheaper, whilst those that actually watch adverts become more expensive. Not a massive shift, but expect to see the cheap slots becoming less sophisticated, and open to ever-smaller companies, which could be a good thing.
Alternatively, maybe the ad-breaks for the skipping-demographics will get shorter, to discourage people from skipping, so ensuring they watch the bother to watch 1 advert that is on (rather than skipping all 20).
I wonder if just writing =RANDOM() would work. Either that or handwritten SQL injection anyone?
Ooo.... I'll have a vowel please Carol.
It's paying for the research, development, and possibly deployment of a new and improved lock.
Well it's paying for the scoping, designing, building, testing, deployment and testing of the shop's security system, which would include a better lock, alarm and bars on the windows. And lots of coffee for the builders.
I'm a Microsoft intern in the UK, and unfortunately we don't get any of this royalty treatment. Free coke though, which again didn't turn out to be anywhere near as exciting as we expected!
I got myself an AM2 processor and mobo last week, and have been using Windows XP x64 since then. Driver support is a really big hassle for any nonstandard hardware. All my usual stuff works fine, but my phone and webcam refuse to work. Software has also been an issue, with me so far being completely unable to find a working DVD application, and I've resorted to using a Virtual PC with XP x86 on. Whilst I can see the benefits of 64-bit computing, the industry seems wholly unprepared for the move they're encouraging us to do. So long as you have 2gig of RAM or under, stick with XP Pro.
It's meant to be 'to' not 'too' as you suggested, and not 'two' as in the article. There are two parts to this.
True, there is a difference between them, but they do look and feel similar. Yes in San Andreas you can swim, fly helicopters, choose clothing, hairstyles, tattoos, get fit, go more places and it does have a better-quality graphics system, but it still feels similar to GTA3.
Don't forget that GTAIII and San Andreas were built for the same console - the Playstation 2. If they're running off the same hardware, then they can only optimize code and rewrite things to make them work swifter. The PS3 and the Xbox 360 are totally new pieces of kit, with a load more power than their predecessors. This is the change that warrants a totally new type of gameplay.
In GTAIV, the way the game works will probably be different. GTA1 had purely driving missions, run over crates for pickups, get your car repainted, and drive into people, other cars, and the rivers. In GTA3 you could get into some buildings, there was a wider range of missions, and (try to) fly the dodo. In Vice City, helicopters came in, and more interiors. San Andreas brought all the above 'fashion' features (gimmiks) and loads more things to do (stealing, jetpack, jumpjet) and a massive city.
What's gonna be different about GTAIV? Well we may have a different style of missions altogether, instead of visiting random people and them sending you on missions you may have to go make business contacts and use your brain a bit more.
I'm not sure, but I can assure you the numbering system matches up to the BIG changes.
Actually their numbering system is still inline. GTA3, Vice City and San Andreas were all part of the GTA3 trilogy, kept the same game engine, design and features (just added onto it). Liberty City Stories was a prequel to GTA3, but still using the same engine, just a little extra thing they did.
GTA, GTA London
GTA2
GTA3, VC, SA, LCS
GTAIV