To allow programs written by stupid developers to work in Windows 7. Many programs have OS version checks that would throw the "Not compatible" stop if it encountered an OS v. 7.0. Making it 6.1 reduces, greatly, the amount of "Not compatible" stops thrown.
Cognos and SAP work fine under Win7 in our infrastructure. I am posting this from a Dell 740, logged on to our WS2K3 AD domain, using SAP and Cognos as well as Office 2003 (and outlook) just fine.
This application compatibility issue arises with every OS upgrade and never is actually as bad as some people seem to want to make it appear.
That said, if you have older systems, or do not have a dedicated budget cycle for hardware/software upgrades, upgrading is (for the most part) pointless. If you do have a dedicated hardware/software cycle and are considering it, grab a copy from MSDN or Technet and test it. You might be surprised...
Fiskar is doing the same thing as it looks like Tesla is trying. Outsource everything. Hire only the people you need, temporarily, and let them go when their job is done.
Whiel it sucks from many perspectives, it is almost *exactly* what is needed for this industry to evolve into a better, leaner, more innovative industry.
The days of GM and Chrysler style auto manufacturing have failed. They can't turn a profit (at least, not in the US). This is an extremely viable solution.
Not to trounce your anonymous anecdote with mine, but I have to back this up.
My HP laptop (1GB of RAM, 1.6GHZ Single-core, Ati Mobility 200M) ran XP like a dog and wouldn't Run Vista at all in any way, shape, or form.
Windows 7? Works. At least...better than XP. Aero enabled, even.
That said, it's a piece of junk, so it doesn't run *anything* super-fast, but considering it's got worse specs than most "netbooks" out there and I can run multiple apps? Not too shabby.
Crime??? Seriously? Someone's going to jail and getting a criminal record over this?;)
The focus of the complaint was bundling and the law does, in fact, expressly forbid it in the instance where one of the products is a monopoly. There is wording regarding other methods of entering a secondary market that do not include bundling, but this refers more to price-fixing, collusion, and so forth.
As to the point of making the browser market competitive again, how does removing IE from the field entirely block competition?
Okay, lots of speculation and misinformation. Let's try and clear this up:
The laws: The EC has laws stating that a company cannot bundle one product of theirs with another if one of those products constitutes and effective monopoly. (No bundling, as this allows the company to use it's monopoly in one market to artificially create one in another.)
The indictment: Microsoft has an effective OS monopoly and bundles with it's OS a Web Browser (IE).
The proposal being floated (not by the EC, but by various members...no judgment has been made) is to force Microsoft to bundle additional browsers with the OS, allowing the consumer to choose among them.
The problem: The proposal does nothing to remedy the original complaint of bundling.
Did it remove the bundled product? No.
Is the law, as written, still being broken? Yes.
So why are we still floating this "solution"? Because it is appealing; It's a nice thought, and the Media has found that articles regarding it generate a huge amount of hits.
What's the point? All we're doing here is making other people rich, really. The "solution"... isn't one. It's a fanciful game of pretend that has little to no meaning with regards to the laws or the actions questioned.
I love you guys. Always with the humorous one-liners.
Seriously? Take a look at it in an Enterprise environment with Windows Server 2008 to manage them.
Blows *anything* you can do in XP, regardless of the backend, out of the water.
We skipped 2000 for XP, we skipped Vista for Win7. We skipped Office 2007 for Office 2010.
I really don't think we could have planned that better if we had tried; Both from a functional/performance standpoint and from the IT angle. {retty sure we're not the only one's doing the version skipping, and I feel sorry for those poor souls stuck with Vista/Office 2k3.;)
This is the *web* people. Scripting is in it''s element here. Why is there no macro/scripting support in Google Docs? The formatting options are extremely limited and it's slow as heck. They *really* need to work on this space before they even consider building an OS around their apps.
Gmail was amazing. Blew everything else out of the water and forced them all to play catch-up. Docs? No such luck. They *really* (I cannot stress this enough) need to make their Google Docs as revolutionary as Gmail was before they should even devote a moments time to this.
They started out right: Get *everyone* using your products (GMail). They needed to take over most commonly used apps...and everyone uses mail. If they could have continued this by adding a mind-blowing chat, doc, spreadsheet, etc, they could have had 90% of what most users do with their PC's locked up. Power it through their own browser "desktop" and once that sinks in, no-one willc are what powers the "desktop" anymore.
*sigh*
Wish they'd done it right. They could have snuck up on OSX/Windows without so much as a whimper and then effortlessly replaced them.
Wow. That was a perfect example of the OP's statement.
It's almost as if you don't know that "the illicit uploading of 24 songs" and "the use of Eugene Sandulenko's work illegally" *both* make a complete mockery of a great deal of effort on the parts of both content creators.
Both are IP. Both took effort to produce and yet for some reason, you don't seem to care at all about one while getting all riled up about the other.
Exactly the point the OP was trying to make. Excellent example, geekboy!
"Ah, so the next time you break any law whatsoever, you think it would be perfectly OK that you should pay arbitrarily large sums of money?"
Breaking laws does not result in arbitrary fines. This was not a criminal case. A settlement was offered, she said, "So sue me"...they did.
"And they were also able to convince most reasonable people that copyright law is in a terrible state, currently."
Irrelevant. As far as the trial and her liability are concerned, she's down 2 for 2 in our courts by 2 panels of her peers. This is how the system works.
"I obviously didn't mean it was personally good for her. But it is obviously good for society in general to be shown the consequences of the bad laws which are currently in place, so that there is some small chance they will be changed (or overruled, or something)."
Agreed....and I almost want to believe it was her lawyers intent all along. Almost. This also, is how it works. this is how broken things get fixed. They *have* to go through the legal system.
Had she been remotely believable, she would have succeeded. Obviously, she was not. Now she can either settle or take the absurd damages to a higher court, but I do think she really needs to stop with the whole "I'm innocent" bit. She lied, she got caught. Accept it and fight the damages.
This is a civil case, not a criminal one. Nothing more than the suspicion that it is *more* likely that she did than that she did not is all that is required.
She wrote an article defending P2P(namely, "Napster") for college. She had Kazaa on her system She had songs from albums she did not own on her system. She outright *lied* tot hem about her hard drive,
That's all they needed to find her liable, and what's more, piss them off enough for being lied to and forced to watch her idiocy to make a point with the insane damages.
No reason they can't take all of their complaints with "The Ribbon" and fix them.
Can't customize it? Allow drag& drop of tools, renaming the "tabs", re-size the icons, headings, show titles, color code the tabs, etc... Fix it.
Can't move it? Allow it to be dragged to the sides, bottom, off the window, to another monitor, remoted to another PC, hidden, etc... Fix it....and above all...*always* allow the user to easily revert to the "old way" of doing things so when they don't have time to "learn" the new interface, they can actually get some *work* done.
The trolls figured out that the latest benchmarks between Vista and XP are now equal if not favoring Vista slightly, so now, when comparing Win7 to XP, they compare it to Vista and use the FUD that "Vista is slower than XP" to come to the dramatic (and incorrect) conclusion that Win7 *must* be slower than XP.
Really...
A Vista vs. Win7 benchmark to compare Win7 to XP?
Seriously?
Are you guys on crack???
Yeah, Vista still sucks....but it's from a *usability* standpoint, not a performance one. That was fixed for the most part after SP1.
Slashdot Mirror
Meh...
Slashdot mods are notoriously ... interesting?
Some moderators (when they actually "get" the joke), will mod it insightful just to help the rep of the poster.
Nothing new, just what happens when you let random people moderate a forum.
OK:
To allow programs written by stupid developers to work in Windows 7. Many programs have OS version checks that would throw the "Not compatible" stop if it encountered an OS v. 7.0. Making it 6.1 reduces, greatly, the amount of "Not compatible" stops thrown.
Cognos and SAP work fine under Win7 in our infrastructure. I am posting this from a Dell 740, logged on to our WS2K3 AD domain, using SAP and Cognos as well as Office 2003 (and outlook) just fine.
This application compatibility issue arises with every OS upgrade and never is actually as bad as some people seem to want to make it appear.
That said, if you have older systems, or do not have a dedicated budget cycle for hardware/software upgrades, upgrading is (for the most part) pointless. If you do have a dedicated hardware/software cycle and are considering it, grab a copy from MSDN or Technet and test it. You might be surprised...
The flaw has been around since 2001.
There goes your theory. ;)
Fiskar is doing the same thing as it looks like Tesla is trying. Outsource everything. Hire only the people you need, temporarily, and let them go when their job is done.
Whiel it sucks from many perspectives, it is almost *exactly* what is needed for this industry to evolve into a better, leaner, more innovative industry.
The days of GM and Chrysler style auto manufacturing have failed. They can't turn a profit (at least, not in the US). This is an extremely viable solution.
Not to trounce your anonymous anecdote with mine, but I have to back this up.
My HP laptop (1GB of RAM, 1.6GHZ Single-core, Ati Mobility 200M) ran XP like a dog and wouldn't Run Vista at all in any way, shape, or form.
Windows 7? Works. At least...better than XP. Aero enabled, even.
That said, it's a piece of junk, so it doesn't run *anything* super-fast, but considering it's got worse specs than most "netbooks" out there and I can run multiple apps? Not too shabby.
Shift-click opens a new instance.
Problem solved. ...in one click.
OK.
Wow..
Crime??? Seriously? Someone's going to jail and getting a criminal record over this? ;)
The focus of the complaint was bundling and the law does, in fact, expressly forbid it in the instance where one of the products is a monopoly. There is wording regarding other methods of entering a secondary market that do not include bundling, but this refers more to price-fixing, collusion, and so forth.
As to the point of making the browser market competitive again, how does removing IE from the field entirely block competition?
Okay, lots of speculation and misinformation. Let's try and clear this up:
The laws: The EC has laws stating that a company cannot bundle one product of theirs with another if one of those products constitutes and effective monopoly. (No bundling, as this allows the company to use it's monopoly in one market to artificially create one in another.)
The indictment: Microsoft has an effective OS monopoly and bundles with it's OS a Web Browser (IE).
The proposal being floated (not by the EC, but by various members...no judgment has been made) is to force Microsoft to bundle additional browsers with the OS, allowing the consumer to choose among them.
The problem: The proposal does nothing to remedy the original complaint of bundling.
Did it remove the bundled product? No.
Is the law, as written, still being broken? Yes.
So why are we still floating this "solution"? Because it is appealing; It's a nice thought, and the Media has found that articles regarding it generate a huge amount of hits.
What's the point? All we're doing here is making other people rich, really. The "solution" ... isn't one. It's a fanciful game of pretend that has little to no meaning with regards to the laws or the actions questioned.
*laughing*
"No benefit..."
I love you guys. Always with the humorous one-liners.
Seriously? Take a look at it in an Enterprise environment with Windows Server 2008 to manage them.
Blows *anything* you can do in XP, regardless of the backend, out of the water.
We skipped 2000 for XP, we skipped Vista for Win7. We skipped Office 2007 for Office 2010.
I really don't think we could have planned that better if we had tried; Both from a functional/performance standpoint and from the IT angle. {retty sure we're not the only one's doing the version skipping, and I feel sorry for those poor souls stuck with Vista/Office 2k3. ;)
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/168270/windows_7_forecast_to_squash_vista_quickly.html
The other side of the coin.
I love predictions. Anyone can make them and anyone can back it up with as much BS as they want. The truth is probably somewhere in between...
Too right.
This is the *web* people. Scripting is in it''s element here. Why is there no macro/scripting support in Google Docs? The formatting options are extremely limited and it's slow as heck. They *really* need to work on this space before they even consider building an OS around their apps.
Gmail was amazing. Blew everything else out of the water and forced them all to play catch-up. Docs? No such luck. They *really* (I cannot stress this enough) need to make their Google Docs as revolutionary as Gmail was before they should even devote a moments time to this.
They started out right: Get *everyone* using your products (GMail). They needed to take over most commonly used apps...and everyone uses mail. If they could have continued this by adding a mind-blowing chat, doc, spreadsheet, etc, they could have had 90% of what most users do with their PC's locked up. Power it through their own browser "desktop" and once that sinks in, no-one willc are what powers the "desktop" anymore.
*sigh*
Wish they'd done it right. They could have snuck up on OSX/Windows without so much as a whimper and then effortlessly replaced them.
Pre-order for Windows 7 Home Premium Upgrade is $49. For Professional, it's $99.
Just an FYI...
*laughing*
Wow. That was a perfect example of the OP's statement.
It's almost as if you don't know that "the illicit uploading of 24 songs" and "the use of Eugene Sandulenko's work illegally" *both* make a complete mockery of a great deal of effort on the parts of both content creators.
Both are IP. Both took effort to produce and yet for some reason, you don't seem to care at all about one while getting all riled up about the other.
Exactly the point the OP was trying to make. Excellent example, geekboy!
"Ah, so the next time you break any law whatsoever, you think it would be perfectly OK that you should pay arbitrarily large sums of money?"
Breaking laws does not result in arbitrary fines. This was not a criminal case. A settlement was offered, she said, "So sue me"...they did.
"And they were also able to convince most reasonable people that copyright law is in a terrible state, currently."
Irrelevant. As far as the trial and her liability are concerned, she's down 2 for 2 in our courts by 2 panels of her peers. This is how the system works.
"I obviously didn't mean it was personally good for her. But it is obviously good for society in general to be shown the consequences of the bad laws which are currently in place, so that there is some small chance they will be changed (or overruled, or something)."
Agreed. ...and I almost want to believe it was her lawyers intent all along. Almost. This also, is how it works. this is how broken things get fixed. They *have* to go through the legal system.
Had she been remotely believable, she would have succeeded. Obviously, she was not. Now she can either settle or take the absurd damages to a higher court, but I do think she really needs to stop with the whole "I'm innocent" bit. She lied, she got caught. Accept it and fight the damages.
That's my opinion of what needs to happen here.
*sigh*
This is a civil case, not a criminal one. Nothing more than the suspicion that it is *more* likely that she did than that she did not is all that is required.
She wrote an article defending P2P(namely, "Napster") for college. She had Kazaa on her system She had songs from albums she did not own on her system. She outright *lied* tot hem about her hard drive,
That's all they needed to find her liable, and what's more, piss them off enough for being lied to and forced to watch her idiocy to make a point with the insane damages.
The lawyers are doing this pro-bono.
She doesn't owe them a dime.
Everything.
Google it.
Best NTFS search engine....ever.
You, sir... ...are not alone.
(No, really.. The room is bugged!! Get out! Quick!)
Agreed.
No reason they can't take all of their complaints with "The Ribbon" and fix them.
Can't customize it? Allow drag& drop of tools, renaming the "tabs", re-size the icons, headings, show titles, color code the tabs, etc... Fix it.
Can't move it? Allow it to be dragged to the sides, bottom, off the window, to another monitor, remoted to another PC, hidden, etc... Fix it. ...and above all...*always* allow the user to easily revert to the "old way" of doing things so when they don't have time to "learn" the new interface, they can actually get some *work* done.
....hide ....the ...ribbon.
(Or...better yet, don't run an Office suite on a PC that doesn't meet the minimum requirements)
*1024x768 or higher resolution monitor.
The trolls figured out that the latest benchmarks between Vista and XP are now equal if not favoring Vista slightly, so now, when comparing Win7 to XP, they compare it to Vista and use the FUD that "Vista is slower than XP" to come to the dramatic (and incorrect) conclusion that Win7 *must* be slower than XP.
Really...
A Vista vs. Win7 benchmark to compare Win7 to XP?
Seriously?
Are you guys on crack???
Yeah, Vista still sucks....but it's from a *usability* standpoint, not a performance one. That was fixed for the most part after SP1.
"It's a commercial OS"
Um, no. It's not. It's a Release Candidate. It's not even a *finished* OS.
The size thing is BS.
Windows mis-represents it due to some odd, stupid (IMO) BS they do with the winsxs folder.
Base-install in VMware with only the "tools" installed generated a 5.3GB .vmdk file.
A bit worse than WinXP's 1.3GB, but a darn sight better than Vista's 8+. (Ubuntu came in at 3-something...)
Frankly, all are a bit too large for most "cheap" SSD drives...but then the cheap ones are dog-slow to begin with.
If you can write a compliant application, and it doesn't work, the spec is incomplete.
Malice or not, the point is that the same bozo's whining about OOXML are now defending ODF regarding the *same* problem.