It is true that hardware certified by MS to be "Vista Ready" that simply has no capability to run the OS lends culpability to them for the current debacle, however, I'm suggesting that said debacle is a result of market and business-to-business forces outside of Microsoft, compelling them to give a "Vista Capable" logo to hardware that shouldn't have it.
However, for what it's worth, I run Vista quite well on old hardware (socket 939 nForce 4 stuff) at home, and what makes it fast isn't related to my FSB or CPU clock speeds, but simply the amount of RAM I have.
I dont like the idea that the real problem is that people are just too cheap
The problem isn't that people are cheap, it's that OEM's lied to consumers by convincing people they could be cheap, and in return they'll get the Ultimate (or perhaps Home basic:P) Computer Experience on a friggin platter.
Vista's problem is, it doesn't really make people feel like they "got what they paid for" in many cases.
What I'm saying is that the fault of that lies not in the operating system but in the garbage machines produced by OEMs. If the "Vista Experience" is what you were seeking, but it is not what you got, I can understand that it's tempting to blame the OS. The fact is that experience is definitely there, but if you can't get to it because your computer can't bring it to you, that is totally the system builder's fault for saying it would happen when it would not (and yours for not investigating the matter first).
Ridiculous hardware requirements brought on by pressure from hardware manufacturers and OEMs who would rather sacrifice Microsoft's reputation than their own. After all, if you hear that Intel sucks, or Dell sucks, maybe you'll buy AMD or HP next time. But if you hear that Windows sucks, you're still going to get Windows when you buy your next computer.
What the OEMs should do is either add an extra GB of RAM and charge $20 more, or load it up with more preinstalled crapware to make up for the cost (without of course consuming 1GB of memory when it runs in the process (and definitely don't take that as advocating crapware)).
There is a problem with the fact that people are buying POS computers and blaming the result on the operating system, and not their uninformed purchase or the sleaziness of OEMs.
It's really sad that, in most cases, cheap OEM computers run like such garbage when the only thing holding them back is a single stick of dirt cheap DDR2.
Further, you mention UAC as being a problem (and you're right, it is) but Vista has been out for such a long time now, and programs that should never need admin access to the machine request it anyway to run, reinforcing the problem. Blame the damned developers.
People want cheap computers with the latest and greatest technology, and OEM's want to maintain as high of a margin as possible. These fundamental conflicts of interest cause these kinds of problems.
Shattered expectations aren't limited to computers either. Ever bought something that you should have spent more money on? I have a snowblower at home that's so underpowered that shoveling takes less time.
My personal belief is that this problem is to blame on hardware manufacturers and OEM's trying, and horribly failing, to deliver what consumers desire (fast computers with brand new technology) and maintain their profit margins (which can't be done for a fast computer at $399 in a retail store).
And what do we do about it? We bash Microsoft. In fact, we bash them so well that everyone, including people who have never used it and those who currently use it (without major issue) that Vista is not a viable choice for them.
Fast forward to December, 2009. Windows 7, which is almost entirely based on the now very stable (dare I say mature) Vista codebase. Not only will it improve perception of Windows due to its excellent compatibility and well honed kernel, it'll force me to shell out cash (unless I can get a Microsoft handout, which is how I got Vista) for the latest Microsoft OS, and prematurely outdate every single Windows License companies have bought in the meantime.
Want Windows Vista SP4...err, I mean Windows 7? $299 please.
When your beer is free, someone still paid for it.
The difference between purchasing software and choosing whether or not to donate to a F/OSS organization is that you choose how much the software (or service) is worth to you, should you actually decide to pay for it.
Disclaimer: I'm a huge advocate of F/OSS, just not Linux... I honestly wish my interests aligned with reality:P
faith for things metaphysical, un(dis)provable either way
Welcome to Reverend Brian Greene's Church of String Theory, child!
Don't forget your copy of The Elegant Universe when you attend our services!
Denial works well here.
on
Googling Security
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
For all we know, Google could have an extensive psych profile on each of us, know the names of everyone in our family, and probably even determine our level of education or our professions based simply on our search queries.
Google's reputation, however, is mighty squeaky clean, and until it is revealed just exactly what kind of information their computers can put together from your web habits (and what, exactly, they do with it), I have a feeling we'll be in denial about it for a very long time. I mean, they really, really have a couple billion metric fucktons of money.
I refuse to put any more information into Facebook than I already have because, unlike Google, Facebook doesn't have quite so evident of a business model.
While this article may be misplaced, I'd say that while regular/. stories are "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters," Idle/. could be considered "News for Nerds, Stuff that Doesn't Matter," but that you still might find interesting.
It's very easy to tell your google you want good ol' Expert Sexchange to fuck off:
-inurl:experts-exchange.com
Add that to your search query. Most of the time I like having their results come up, but every now and then, the results are so polluted that I need them gone. Rule of thumb is that if an Expert Sexchange result comes up, your problem is either *that* stupid, obvious, or uncommon.
Indeed I am. Items stored in the registry by a program (assuming it wasn't written by an idiot, which is never guaranteed) show up in a predictable location, like HKLM\Software or HKCU\Software, depending on the scope of the settings or the application's purpose. Further, the syntax and presentation of data in the registry is identical from one application to another, though admittedly keys and values can have some really stupid names.
Conf files just tend to drive me up the wall, and are prone to be a bit of a clusterfuck of information, oft times organized in a very unwieldy fashion.
It truly is a preference though, I know there's downsides to the registry, which in many ways has grown into a bit of a clusterfuck itself as time has gone on.:P
I much prefer the registry as a centralized configuration store rather than rummaging around the entire hard drive to grab for.conf files, each of which is laid out differently.
Though, applications which require more data settings storage tend to opt for SQL Express or something like it, to which I actually prefer.conf files.
Anyway, XP Embedded is probably what Microsoft's intending as a replacement...
That would actually rock. If there was full AD support and ADM/ADMX files that could be used on appliances... Wait, that probably makes my job harder.
Seriously though, if you haven't had a chance, grab WinFLP. It's based off of XP embedded. I use it, stripped down (which doesn't say much) on spare machines for gaming.
Painfully untrue, especially in Server 2008 (for which the core install doesn't even have a GUI). There are scripts, tools, and other things that make remote administration of windows possible in many ways that were much harder, previously. No GUI needed.
Seconded.
The real question is how much bandwidth you need for the WMI calls/data that all the new MMC's use... could potentially give him a GUI to work with over his slow connection if he so desires.
Free peering from all the tier 1 isp's is the definition of tier 1 connectivity... which is a bit of a broken definition. I've got my own reservations about how broken the internet's implementation of tiers is, but that's another story:P
Still, if those IP's are online and routable from a tier 1 connection, they fit into my definition.
I would define internet access as full connectivity to all of the IP addresses shown here that are not marked as Unallocated, Multicast, or Reserved, on all source and destination ports.
Slashdot Mirror
It is true that hardware certified by MS to be "Vista Ready" that simply has no capability to run the OS lends culpability to them for the current debacle, however, I'm suggesting that said debacle is a result of market and business-to-business forces outside of Microsoft, compelling them to give a "Vista Capable" logo to hardware that shouldn't have it.
However, for what it's worth, I run Vista quite well on old hardware (socket 939 nForce 4 stuff) at home, and what makes it fast isn't related to my FSB or CPU clock speeds, but simply the amount of RAM I have.
I dont like the idea that the real problem is that people are just too cheap
The problem isn't that people are cheap, it's that OEM's lied to consumers by convincing people they could be cheap, and in return they'll get the Ultimate (or perhaps Home basic :P) Computer Experience on a friggin platter.
Vista's problem is, it doesn't really make people feel like they "got what they paid for" in many cases.
What I'm saying is that the fault of that lies not in the operating system but in the garbage machines produced by OEMs. If the "Vista Experience" is what you were seeking, but it is not what you got, I can understand that it's tempting to blame the OS. The fact is that experience is definitely there, but if you can't get to it because your computer can't bring it to you, that is totally the system builder's fault for saying it would happen when it would not (and yours for not investigating the matter first).
Ridiculous hardware requirements brought on by pressure from hardware manufacturers and OEMs who would rather sacrifice Microsoft's reputation than their own. After all, if you hear that Intel sucks, or Dell sucks, maybe you'll buy AMD or HP next time. But if you hear that Windows sucks, you're still going to get Windows when you buy your next computer.
What the OEMs should do is either add an extra GB of RAM and charge $20 more, or load it up with more preinstalled crapware to make up for the cost (without of course consuming 1GB of memory when it runs in the process (and definitely don't take that as advocating crapware)).
There is a problem with the fact that people are buying POS computers and blaming the result on the operating system, and not their uninformed purchase or the sleaziness of OEMs.
It's really sad that, in most cases, cheap OEM computers run like such garbage when the only thing holding them back is a single stick of dirt cheap DDR2.
Further, you mention UAC as being a problem (and you're right, it is) but Vista has been out for such a long time now, and programs that should never need admin access to the machine request it anyway to run, reinforcing the problem. Blame the damned developers.
People want cheap computers with the latest and greatest technology, and OEM's want to maintain as high of a margin as possible. These fundamental conflicts of interest cause these kinds of problems.
Shattered expectations aren't limited to computers either. Ever bought something that you should have spent more money on? I have a snowblower at home that's so underpowered that shoveling takes less time.
My personal belief is that this problem is to blame on hardware manufacturers and OEM's trying, and horribly failing, to deliver what consumers desire (fast computers with brand new technology) and maintain their profit margins (which can't be done for a fast computer at $399 in a retail store).
And what do we do about it? We bash Microsoft. In fact, we bash them so well that everyone, including people who have never used it and those who currently use it (without major issue) that Vista is not a viable choice for them.
Fast forward to December, 2009. Windows 7, which is almost entirely based on the now very stable (dare I say mature) Vista codebase. Not only will it improve perception of Windows due to its excellent compatibility and well honed kernel, it'll force me to shell out cash (unless I can get a Microsoft handout, which is how I got Vista) for the latest Microsoft OS, and prematurely outdate every single Windows License companies have bought in the meantime.
Want Windows Vista SP4...err, I mean Windows 7? $299 please.
We have no one to blame but ourselves.
It wouldn't be too far of a jump to assume that voluntary termination is a clause they hold quite dearly in their side of that contract.
Not only is it doing science, it feels fantastic and it's still alive.
When your beer is free, someone still paid for it.
:P
The difference between purchasing software and choosing whether or not to donate to a F/OSS organization is that you choose how much the software (or service) is worth to you, should you actually decide to pay for it.
Disclaimer: I'm a huge advocate of F/OSS, just not Linux... I honestly wish my interests aligned with reality
faith for things metaphysical, un(dis)provable either way
Welcome to Reverend Brian Greene's Church of String Theory, child!
Don't forget your copy of The Elegant Universe when you attend our services!
For all we know, Google could have an extensive psych profile on each of us, know the names of everyone in our family, and probably even determine our level of education or our professions based simply on our search queries.
:P
Google's reputation, however, is mighty squeaky clean, and until it is revealed just exactly what kind of information their computers can put together from your web habits (and what, exactly, they do with it), I have a feeling we'll be in denial about it for a very long time. I mean, they really, really have a couple billion metric fucktons of money.
I refuse to put any more information into Facebook than I already have because, unlike Google, Facebook doesn't have quite so evident of a business model.
Google away.
While this article may be misplaced, I'd say that while regular /. stories are "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters," Idle /. could be considered "News for Nerds, Stuff that Doesn't Matter," but that you still might find interesting.
If they're your friends, at least you like those people.
I've got co-workers.
Commemorative Bot Sex.
Very apropos to MST3k.
It's very easy to tell your google you want good ol' Expert Sexchange to fuck off:
-inurl:experts-exchange.com
Add that to your search query. Most of the time I like having their results come up, but every now and then, the results are so polluted that I need them gone. Rule of thumb is that if an Expert Sexchange result comes up, your problem is either *that* stupid, obvious, or uncommon.
Indeed I am. Items stored in the registry by a program (assuming it wasn't written by an idiot, which is never guaranteed) show up in a predictable location, like HKLM\Software or HKCU\Software, depending on the scope of the settings or the application's purpose. Further, the syntax and presentation of data in the registry is identical from one application to another, though admittedly keys and values can have some really stupid names.
:P
Conf files just tend to drive me up the wall, and are prone to be a bit of a clusterfuck of information, oft times organized in a very unwieldy fashion.
It truly is a preference though, I know there's downsides to the registry, which in many ways has grown into a bit of a clusterfuck itself as time has gone on.
I much prefer the registry as a centralized configuration store rather than rummaging around the entire hard drive to grab for .conf files, each of which is laid out differently.
.conf files.
Though, applications which require more data settings storage tend to opt for SQL Express or something like it, to which I actually prefer
Oh man... I remember Win32s... I recall using it but don't recall if I ever did anything with it other than play freecell.
Any idea why Win32s wasn't working?
I don't care of the meat looks like a softball so long as it tastes good.
A large contributor to flavor in beef (and I suspect many other meats) is the presence of the bone when it's cooked. Just ask your butcher.
Anyway, XP Embedded is probably what Microsoft's intending as a replacement...
That would actually rock. If there was full AD support and ADM/ADMX files that could be used on appliances... Wait, that probably makes my job harder.
Seriously though, if you haven't had a chance, grab WinFLP. It's based off of XP embedded. I use it, stripped down (which doesn't say much) on spare machines for gaming.
If IE6 were to run on it though, most modern internet websites would render correctly.
Shame. I would honestly load it up on one of these work machines for fun.
....Damn. I need to get laid.
Painfully untrue, especially in Server 2008 (for which the core install doesn't even have a GUI). There are scripts, tools, and other things that make remote administration of windows possible in many ways that were much harder, previously. No GUI needed.
Seconded.
The real question is how much bandwidth you need for the WMI calls/data that all the new MMC's use... could potentially give him a GUI to work with over his slow connection if he so desires.
While that's interesting, how did you come to that conclusion?
Free peering from all the tier 1 isp's is the definition of tier 1 connectivity... which is a bit of a broken definition. I've got my own reservations about how broken the internet's implementation of tiers is, but that's another story :P
Still, if those IP's are online and routable from a tier 1 connection, they fit into my definition.
Well... If using a CB radio means you're pleasuring yourself, then I guess that is the internet.
I would define internet access as full connectivity to all of the IP addresses shown here that are not marked as Unallocated, Multicast, or Reserved, on all source and destination ports.
But that's just me.