Then I demand the rights to name your firstborn. I can if I state it in a EULA right? No company has the right to being abusive and you can NEVER relinquish certain rights, even if you wanted to. I can't sell mysrlf into slavery and I can't give Google eternal and everlasting control over my computer, EULA or not.
As far as I know, no country has the right to not have update software installed on your computer after you agree to an EULA enshrined in its constitution. Selling your first born or selling yourself into slavery is prohibited by a number of laws. That was just a terrible argument.
Take personal responsibility for installing the software. If you don't like it, don't install it. You're talking about asking the government to punish a company because you don't like the way they've changed their software. Does that seem reasonable to you?
I still think the targeted system argument is valid. You agreed that Windows is not as bad as it used to be, and mentioned that most computers are behind NAT routers anyway. The network services guys at work used to contact as from time to time to let us know they had disabled a port in a residence room. Unusual amounts of network activity (like 1000's of emails per hour) flags a port. To get an outbreak under control, 5-10 ports typically had to be disabled. Not a tonne of infection.
The amount of malware and virus infected machines that came into the help desk was a different story. Limewire, BearShare, screen savers, weather apps for the system tray... these are the vectors for attack. User run programs. From what we could tell, remote exploits were a very small part of the problem. With a fairly well isolated system of VLANs and firewalls to mitigate remote exploits we still had malware problems.
Network security has been improved (mostly by everybody being behind a router) and it's been while since the major Windows worm outbreaks. I honestly think that when Windows falls and another OS takes the top spot, it will have exactly the same problems. When the user base gets there and people start downloading cracked copies of The Sims 3 for [YourNewOS] you'll have problems. When people start using the new chat client, we will see malware replicate this way as well.
I don't think there will be any decrease in the number or success rate of the attacks, since the gap in hardening against remote exploits is narrowing, even if it is due to the world getting behind cheap home routers.
Contrary to Windows having in general poor security, I don't think I've had a virus since the late 90's. Yes, there could be well hidden viruses, but I do on occasion run fire up Process Explorer, run netstat to see what's open, and run WireShark on different system to see what's coming out of my machine. No problems. Why? I know sketchy downloads and emails when I see them.
I don't argue that Windows is better or even as good as Unix in security, but I do say that switching to Unix won't help.
I don't think any differences in design between Windows and Unix systems will help. Judging from the people I've met working at a computer help desk, uneducated users who are allowed to run as root ever will find a way to install malware. The only secure OS is one in which the user cannot ever under any circumstances run as root. Having to type in your root password vs. having to click a cancel/allow dialog box isn't going to make the user any more perceptive when it comes to determining if the latest Cool Screensaver is legit.
I think that the user permissions argument isn't particularly good either. Yes, you require root access to own my system, but as soon as you get me to run an executable or script under my own user you have access too all the files I care about anyway. Having an unbootable computer is an inconvenience; losing my privacy is a lot worse.
Emulators are the way to go. I set up an HTPC with emulators in the living room. Any time we're sitting around having a few pre-night out drinks we're playing Dr. Mario, Double Dragon II, Yoshi's Island or Micro Machines.
And for controllers, nothing beats the feel of the original SNES game pads. You can pick up an adapter here http://www.retrousb.com/ and some SNES controllers at a thrift store for a couple of bucks.
Most people I work with only use Windows for checking Notes, using Sametime and composing the occasional Word document. The development is all done on Linux, because Windows is pretty terrible for that.
I use Synergy, so my keyboard and mouse controls my Linux desktop and my ThinkPad. When I'm actually coding, I'm not using Windows at all. It might be a bigger issue for some who are using VNC to connect to the Linux box and are stuck dealing with Windows.
If they switched me over to Mac, I can't see my productivity increasing at all. It would fall while I fiddled with the system, but would come back up to about what it is now. It won't make me type email any faster, and certainly won't stop me from checking Slashdot at work.
What is the advantage then? Not sure. As long as the hardware in my laptop is working, I don't have to do much. All updates are automatic. It would probably be expensive to switch over all of the infrastructure and support.
I did a CS degree. Computer Science falls under the Faculty of Engineering at the school, but had our own set of rules, different from whatever they chose to do for any kind of engineering. Many of the engineering classes were graded on a curve. The only class I ever had graded on a curve was first year calculus.
Near the end of my University career I really started paying attention to grades. Our school has a 1-9 grading system, converted from your percentage in the class. Get a 89%, you get an 8.0. Get 90%, you get a 9.0. Integers only for your average in a class.
The upper level classes weren't easy. Work load was pretty high, and grading was frequently tough. I generally jockeyed for first place in these classes, and usually ended up getting one of the top 3 marks. The thing that pissed me off was that frequently the highest grade awarded was a 7.0, or maybe one single 8.0 for the whole class. It made it damn near impossible to get the 9.0 that would boost your GPA. Pretty frustrating when you find you've beaten a class of 60 and you effort is only worth a 7.0.
My engineering buddies told me that for them it was more important to beat everyone else in the class, because the grade would likely be scaled up. You could get yourself a 9.0 in a class by getting 70% of the work if the class was scaled.
Yes, engineers took an extra class every semester and generally had it pretty hard. But when it comes down to it, they bust their asses and get a 9.0, and I'm busting my ass in a course that pretty much has a cap of 7.0. Makes me wish my classes were just brutal and scaled, because I still would have worked harder and beat most of the people in the class, and would have gotten a better mark for the transcript.
Business class for sure.
I'm currently doing a work term for IBM. Being a student, I didn't get a fancy new T61 like everybody else. I got an old T40, which belonged to somebody else on my team. This thing is at least 4 years old, and is still going amazingly strong. We dock and undock our machines all day long for meetings, throw them in bags, open and close them 10-15 times per day. Mine gets thrown in a backpack for an hour and half commute to and from work by subway and bus. It's regularly outside in sub-zero temperatures while I wait for buses, and complains far less than I do.
The hinges are still stiff, the screen is still bright, every button and key works like the day it was new. And I know for a fact that the person who had this laptop before me didn't use an external keyboard or mouse -- this laptop has a large, deep groove in the left mouse button from the years of her thumb wearing it down.
Compare this to the HP I bought a couple of years ago. Within a year the screen was dim and it was locking up. My computer help desk experience showed me all the weak points of a laptop. Screen brightness, floppy/broken hinges, broken DVD drives. None of that here.
Before my time is up in this position I'm going to take IBM up on its deep discount for employees. I don't think I'll ever buy another brand.
Isn't the whole idea behind any user interface to hide the way programs run from the user? Is Google "lying" to you when simply type in a search term instead of some ridiculous SQL command (or whatever it is they use)?
Anyway, I'm not sure which users you're referring to in this case, but I'm pretty sure you could try to explain to most people all day the difference between a new process and a new thread and get absolutely nowhere.
You're right about dual monitors -- does make it easier. The main thing is that it's resolution dependent, and not so much a problem with the OS.
I can fit 3 SSH windows and web browser on my 1400x1050 resolution laptop, without having to switch windows at all. On an old G3 clamshell laptop (or any other low-res screen), you can fit one window max. A different operating system isn't going to help you with this problem. If you have a small screen, you will have to switch windows back and forth. Pretty hard to multitask with that.
Exposé is pretty good, yes, but the taskbar isn't bad either. And I still say that at a glance it gives me more information about what I am doing with my computer.
My problem is with the statement that Windows is a singletasking OS. If you believe that, you'd probably have to say the same thing about Linux with Gnome or KDE, which both follow a lot of the Windows design paradigm. It's perfectly possible with any of these systems to have more than one window on the screen at the same time, without overlap.
Really, I just don't get how this is singletasking.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on the "Windows singletasking frame of mind."
I regularly work with several SSH sessions, text editors and web browsers open at the same time on my dual monitor system. There really isn't a big problem multitasking in Windows. I've also got all of the menu bars visible at all times without having to switch window focus. I'd say that's an advantage.
If I do have too many windows open at once to fit them all on the screen, I find the Windows/Gnome/KDE style taskbar to be a far superior solution than the information poor dock, as mentioned in the article.
I'm really just not sure what you're getting at here -- it's no more difficult to multitask in Windows than in any other OS, from what I've experienced.
My comp sci networking class assignment was on my home server, and I use EasyDNS. Had to bus home and put it on a USB stick. Last day of class, and the end of a particularly brutal week.
I haven't used Quicksilver myself, but I did find a page with some similar Windows programs. Not sure how they differ from Quicksilver. Also available for Linux are Gnome Launch Box and Katapult.
I actually don't spend a lot of time launching my programs. I open my web browser, terminal windows and editor and start working. The time spend launching programs is pretty minimal. The quicklaunch and links toolbars have been working great for me. I don't think there is much out there for any platform that's going to help me type faster;-)
The amount of additional work I can get done from being able to view my code, test results and web references all at the same time is significant.
I've owned several Macs, and have tried hard to like OS X -- but the advantage just isn't there for me. I haven't had any problems with Windows, and I'm not missing any crucial (or non-crucial) apps.
One thing sticking with Windows (and dual booting Linux) has given me is a greater choice of hardware. I'll admit that Apple is not more expensive if you just want "a computer." Mac Minis and MacBooks are pretty competitively priced. However, I'm looking for more choice in my hardware.
The usually price comparisons between Apple and Dell or Gateway hardware don't work for me, because I don't want a built in webcam, I don't need gigabit ethernet right now, I don't need bluetooth, don't need discrete graphics card etc. What I do want is a very high resolution screen. I'm running 1400x1050 on an HP laptop purchased for $1250 CDN. 1 GB of RAM, DL-DVD burner... didn't skimp on options. To get an Apple machine that runs at a similar (but lower) resolution would cost me $2200. Plus, that second button beneath the trackpad is priceless.
Hardware options are part of the advantage of... not so much sticking with Windows as not using OS X. Productivity would suffer if I couldn't have 2 terminal windows, an editor and a web browser running at the same time.
Anyway, I saw no pros to switching, only the loss of hardware options.
Actually, a good percentage of the Macs sold at my campus computer store are being sold with Windows pre-loaded, at the customer's request. People don't seem to mind paying the additional $120 or so for an OEM copy...
Slashdot Mirror
Then I demand the rights to name your firstborn. I can if I state it in a EULA right? No company has the right to being abusive and you can NEVER relinquish certain rights, even if you wanted to. I can't sell mysrlf into slavery and I can't give Google eternal and everlasting control over my computer, EULA or not.
As far as I know, no country has the right to not have update software installed on your computer after you agree to an EULA enshrined in its constitution. Selling your first born or selling yourself into slavery is prohibited by a number of laws. That was just a terrible argument.
Take personal responsibility for installing the software. If you don't like it, don't install it. You're talking about asking the government to punish a company because you don't like the way they've changed their software. Does that seem reasonable to you?
I still think the targeted system argument is valid. You agreed that Windows is not as bad as it used to be, and mentioned that most computers are behind NAT routers anyway. The network services guys at work used to contact as from time to time to let us know they had disabled a port in a residence room. Unusual amounts of network activity (like 1000's of emails per hour) flags a port. To get an outbreak under control, 5-10 ports typically had to be disabled. Not a tonne of infection.
The amount of malware and virus infected machines that came into the help desk was a different story. Limewire, BearShare, screen savers, weather apps for the system tray... these are the vectors for attack. User run programs. From what we could tell, remote exploits were a very small part of the problem. With a fairly well isolated system of VLANs and firewalls to mitigate remote exploits we still had malware problems.
Network security has been improved (mostly by everybody being behind a router) and it's been while since the major Windows worm outbreaks. I honestly think that when Windows falls and another OS takes the top spot, it will have exactly the same problems. When the user base gets there and people start downloading cracked copies of The Sims 3 for [YourNewOS] you'll have problems. When people start using the new chat client, we will see malware replicate this way as well.
I don't think there will be any decrease in the number or success rate of the attacks, since the gap in hardening against remote exploits is narrowing, even if it is due to the world getting behind cheap home routers.
Contrary to Windows having in general poor security, I don't think I've had a virus since the late 90's. Yes, there could be well hidden viruses, but I do on occasion run fire up Process Explorer, run netstat to see what's open, and run WireShark on different system to see what's coming out of my machine. No problems. Why? I know sketchy downloads and emails when I see them.
I don't argue that Windows is better or even as good as Unix in security, but I do say that switching to Unix won't help.
I don't think any differences in design between Windows and Unix systems will help. Judging from the people I've met working at a computer help desk, uneducated users who are allowed to run as root ever will find a way to install malware. The only secure OS is one in which the user cannot ever under any circumstances run as root. Having to type in your root password vs. having to click a cancel/allow dialog box isn't going to make the user any more perceptive when it comes to determining if the latest Cool Screensaver is legit.
I think that the user permissions argument isn't particularly good either. Yes, you require root access to own my system, but as soon as you get me to run an executable or script under my own user you have access too all the files I care about anyway. Having an unbootable computer is an inconvenience; losing my privacy is a lot worse.
Emulators are the way to go. I set up an HTPC with emulators in the living room. Any time we're sitting around having a few pre-night out drinks we're playing Dr. Mario, Double Dragon II, Yoshi's Island or Micro Machines.
And for controllers, nothing beats the feel of the original SNES game pads. You can pick up an adapter here http://www.retrousb.com/ and some SNES controllers at a thrift store for a couple of bucks.
Most people I work with only use Windows for checking Notes, using Sametime and composing the occasional Word document. The development is all done on Linux, because Windows is pretty terrible for that.
I use Synergy, so my keyboard and mouse controls my Linux desktop and my ThinkPad. When I'm actually coding, I'm not using Windows at all. It might be a bigger issue for some who are using VNC to connect to the Linux box and are stuck dealing with Windows.
If they switched me over to Mac, I can't see my productivity increasing at all. It would fall while I fiddled with the system, but would come back up to about what it is now. It won't make me type email any faster, and certainly won't stop me from checking Slashdot at work.
What is the advantage then? Not sure. As long as the hardware in my laptop is working, I don't have to do much. All updates are automatic. It would probably be expensive to switch over all of the infrastructure and support.
I did a CS degree. Computer Science falls under the Faculty of Engineering at the school, but had our own set of rules, different from whatever they chose to do for any kind of engineering. Many of the engineering classes were graded on a curve. The only class I ever had graded on a curve was first year calculus.
Near the end of my University career I really started paying attention to grades. Our school has a 1-9 grading system, converted from your percentage in the class. Get a 89%, you get an 8.0. Get 90%, you get a 9.0. Integers only for your average in a class.
The upper level classes weren't easy. Work load was pretty high, and grading was frequently tough. I generally jockeyed for first place in these classes, and usually ended up getting one of the top 3 marks. The thing that pissed me off was that frequently the highest grade awarded was a 7.0, or maybe one single 8.0 for the whole class. It made it damn near impossible to get the 9.0 that would boost your GPA. Pretty frustrating when you find you've beaten a class of 60 and you effort is only worth a 7.0.
My engineering buddies told me that for them it was more important to beat everyone else in the class, because the grade would likely be scaled up. You could get yourself a 9.0 in a class by getting 70% of the work if the class was scaled.
Yes, engineers took an extra class every semester and generally had it pretty hard. But when it comes down to it, they bust their asses and get a 9.0, and I'm busting my ass in a course that pretty much has a cap of 7.0. Makes me wish my classes were just brutal and scaled, because I still would have worked harder and beat most of the people in the class, and would have gotten a better mark for the transcript.
Feel free to mod me -1, Bitter!
Business class for sure. I'm currently doing a work term for IBM. Being a student, I didn't get a fancy new T61 like everybody else. I got an old T40, which belonged to somebody else on my team. This thing is at least 4 years old, and is still going amazingly strong. We dock and undock our machines all day long for meetings, throw them in bags, open and close them 10-15 times per day. Mine gets thrown in a backpack for an hour and half commute to and from work by subway and bus. It's regularly outside in sub-zero temperatures while I wait for buses, and complains far less than I do. The hinges are still stiff, the screen is still bright, every button and key works like the day it was new. And I know for a fact that the person who had this laptop before me didn't use an external keyboard or mouse -- this laptop has a large, deep groove in the left mouse button from the years of her thumb wearing it down. Compare this to the HP I bought a couple of years ago. Within a year the screen was dim and it was locking up. My computer help desk experience showed me all the weak points of a laptop. Screen brightness, floppy/broken hinges, broken DVD drives. None of that here. Before my time is up in this position I'm going to take IBM up on its deep discount for employees. I don't think I'll ever buy another brand.
Isn't the whole idea behind any user interface to hide the way programs run from the user? Is Google "lying" to you when simply type in a search term instead of some ridiculous SQL command (or whatever it is they use)? Anyway, I'm not sure which users you're referring to in this case, but I'm pretty sure you could try to explain to most people all day the difference between a new process and a new thread and get absolutely nowhere.
You're right about dual monitors -- does make it easier. The main thing is that it's resolution dependent, and not so much a problem with the OS.
I can fit 3 SSH windows and web browser on my 1400x1050 resolution laptop, without having to switch windows at all. On an old G3 clamshell laptop (or any other low-res screen), you can fit one window max. A different operating system isn't going to help you with this problem. If you have a small screen, you will have to switch windows back and forth. Pretty hard to multitask with that.
Exposé is pretty good, yes, but the taskbar isn't bad either. And I still say that at a glance it gives me more information about what I am doing with my computer.
My problem is with the statement that Windows is a singletasking OS. If you believe that, you'd probably have to say the same thing about Linux with Gnome or KDE, which both follow a lot of the Windows design paradigm. It's perfectly possible with any of these systems to have more than one window on the screen at the same time, without overlap.
Really, I just don't get how this is singletasking.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on the "Windows singletasking frame of mind."
I regularly work with several SSH sessions, text editors and web browsers open at the same time on my dual monitor system. There really isn't a big problem multitasking in Windows. I've also got all of the menu bars visible at all times without having to switch window focus. I'd say that's an advantage.
If I do have too many windows open at once to fit them all on the screen, I find the Windows/Gnome/KDE style taskbar to be a far superior solution than the information poor dock, as mentioned in the article.
I'm really just not sure what you're getting at here -- it's no more difficult to multitask in Windows than in any other OS, from what I've experienced.
Unfortunately I did not know my IP at the time. Technically it's dynamically assigned, but it hasn't changed for years.
I even tried checking the DNS caches of the machines I used at work to connect to the home server when it was working... but no luck.
Oops, by EasyDNS I mean EveryDNS.
This really made yesterday difficult for me.
My comp sci networking class assignment was on my home server, and I use EasyDNS. Had to bus home and put it on a USB stick. Last day of class, and the end of a particularly brutal week.
I haven't used Quicksilver myself, but I did find a page with some similar Windows programs. Not sure how they differ from Quicksilver. Also available for Linux are Gnome Launch Box and Katapult.
I actually don't spend a lot of time launching my programs. I open my web browser, terminal windows and editor and start working. The time spend launching programs is pretty minimal. The quicklaunch and links toolbars have been working great for me. I don't think there is much out there for any platform that's going to help me type faster ;-)
The amount of additional work I can get done from being able to view my code, test results and web references all at the same time is significant.
Yes, I feel the same way.
I've owned several Macs, and have tried hard to like OS X -- but the advantage just isn't there for me. I haven't had any problems with Windows, and I'm not missing any crucial (or non-crucial) apps.
One thing sticking with Windows (and dual booting Linux) has given me is a greater choice of hardware. I'll admit that Apple is not more expensive if you just want "a computer." Mac Minis and MacBooks are pretty competitively priced. However, I'm looking for more choice in my hardware.
The usually price comparisons between Apple and Dell or Gateway hardware don't work for me, because I don't want a built in webcam, I don't need gigabit ethernet right now, I don't need bluetooth, don't need discrete graphics card etc. What I do want is a very high resolution screen. I'm running 1400x1050 on an HP laptop purchased for $1250 CDN. 1 GB of RAM, DL-DVD burner... didn't skimp on options. To get an Apple machine that runs at a similar (but lower) resolution would cost me $2200. Plus, that second button beneath the trackpad is priceless.
Hardware options are part of the advantage of... not so much sticking with Windows as not using OS X. Productivity would suffer if I couldn't have 2 terminal windows, an editor and a web browser running at the same time.
Anyway, I saw no pros to switching, only the loss of hardware options.
Actually, a good percentage of the Macs sold at my campus computer store are being sold with Windows pre-loaded, at the customer's request. People don't seem to mind paying the additional $120 or so for an OEM copy...