Microsoft told you everyone upgrading from an older system would need to buy a new one?
Really? I call Bullshit....and the teenage guy at Wally World...now there's a veritable wealth of trustworthy and reliable information. I bet he gave you some good tips for getting rid of acne too...
The studios are cutting off their own cash supply.
Right now, at least in the US, the scales are tipping. The folks that were raised with the VHS/DVD mentality are slipping under the "majority". The new majority doesn't want the DVDs. They realize they don't need to have the physical media, and don't care to "build a library" of movies they'll only watch once.
These people are *dying* to give the studios their money but are limited to options they do not care for.
These people are paying $20+ a month now for movies and TV shows that have been out for ages already on Netflix. These people would be giving that money directly to a studio-run group that offered new releases and "in season" TV programming. In a heartbeat. It's a no-brainer.
But no such group, no such site, no such service exists...much to our dismay.
We don't buy DVD's. We don't get "captured" by ratings. We wait. We wait for them to come out @ RedBox, or on Netflix, or Hulu... We wait to spend our money, and we end up spending less because we forget some of the movies we saw previews for that we would have watched, and we forget about shows that we don't have time to follow on TV....and when the radio stations stop playing the songs we liked...we've moved on as well.
The studios and labels could be getting this money and then some...NOW.
If they'd only pull their heads out of their asses long enough to watch us spend it elsewhere.
I subscribe to Netflix.
I subscribe to Pandora....and I am wondering when the studios and labels will decide *my* money is good enough for *them*. Until then, they'll see only a small percentage of what they *could* be getting from me.
God forbid they allow you to choose what you want to use to play back those movies in quicktime format....you did know there are other programs that can handle qt format videos just fine, right?
Bit Torrent rips still need to be cracked (or include cracks...which may or may not work for the foreseeable future, likely may not) Bit Torrent rips may or may not be the untouched, unmodified, virus/malware-free copies available on TechNet (most likely not). Bit torrent rip=MSFT gets nothing. TechNet=Microsoft gets ~$260 a year (depending on your ability to find "coupons")
Looks to me like TechNet is the best of all worlds. Activated copies from TechNet do not require cracks, certified downloads direct from Microsoft don't carry the very real possibility of being hacked copies stuffed with malware (go for the Windows is malware meme. Come on, we know you want to...), and Microsoft even gets a little something for their trouble.
So firefox allows a rogue addon to install without any user intervention and the story is all about how evil MSFT is?
Sure, they did it. Bad Microsoft.
But isn't the bigger issue that now that this is known....*anyone* can pull this on firefox users?
No. I am not apologizing for Microsoft. This was "Sony Stupid" of them. We're used to that here, though. What we're not used to (and apparently sweeping under the rug) is the massive, unholy hell of a mess mozilla's extension system for firefox is....
Not that I have verified that this is actually the wording, but:
"- use or run programs from the Premises that provide network content or any other services to anyone outside of your Premises LAN, except for personal and non-commercial residential use;"
"personal use" is defined as for your individual use. As others are connecting to your system and retrieving data from it, it is for your "personal" use...and the "personal" use of any of about a billion other people.
"Residential use" is a bit less strictly defined, but as you have no idea where that data from your P2P app is going, you're screwed regardless.
They are not the government, and as such, can shoot first and ask questions later (presuming guilt and shutting you down). Hell, they don't even have to ask questions later if they don't feel like it...
Sounds a lot like I am defending them, but in reality, I am just as annoyed by these things as most others are. I just am not out looking for excuse or rationalization regarding how I am right and they've got nothing on me.
I've seen to many people lose their internet (and not be able to sign up for the nearest competitor) or get sued to even think that I might remotely have any more or less of a chance at getting away with it than any of them did.
I know that's probably not something Comcast is interested in supporting, but it's not against the ToS,"
Um, yes actually. It is. P2P acts to serve files to multiple recipients. This type of action is normally considered "serving". Comcast's ToS specifically disallows the use of Residential Internet Service for the purposes of running any type of server.
"Admin rights are required on all the computers for access to active directory and such."
BZZT!
Access to AD only requires the *user* have admin rights, not the Computer.
Try this (has worked wonders for us):
Create two accounts for each user. One for day-today use, one for AD admin tasks. (Add AD in front of their username or some such) Secure their day-to-day as a limited user account. Lock the admin account down. Don't even give them proxy access or network share access.
Create a shortcut on their desktops (to dsa.msc, or whatever) and right-click it. Under properties/advanced, set it to run with alternate credentials.
Now, when they log into their day-to-day accounts, they can still open the dsa shortcut and enter i their "admin" account credentials to manage the AD, but now neither the AD account or their mornal day-to-day account will be capable of installing "AV2009".
Can't wait!...until then, I will continue to use the products the rest of the corporate world uses as long as they fit my needs.
I develop in Excel. More than just "speadsheets". I have no great ill or liking towards the ribbon, it is simply another means to the same end.
However, it does have some potential. The idea is sound (make the features utilized most easier to access), but they were too wide (or too narrow depending on how you look at it) in their interpretation.
They need to make it learn; make it customizable. So that the features *you* use most are easier to access....not the features the "lite" users access most frequently. They didn't allow for different types of users.
That said, I have high hopes from some of what I have heard regarding enhancements to the ribbon in O2KX that indicate a heading in that general direction.
The first funny thing is, these (80%) are people who got used to doing it with menus...because they work with excel all day.
The second funny thing is that the majority of Excel users are not advanced or even intermediate, but rather Customer Service Reps and the like who use it almost solely for keeping lists and such.
Microsoft is taking data from the majority of it's users. The majority of it's users happen to be novices. They have made it easier for them at the expense of the advanced/intermediate minority because they *figure* those few can actually figure it out regardless of the interface. (Ya know...keyboard shortcuts?)
"Unless Windows 7 has changed radically how drivers work under Windows, those usually require user installation on drivers. So, in different words, you're bullshitting."
Bull. Wireless NIC? Detected during install. Printer? If USB - detected during install. If Wireless/networked, detected through add-printer wizard...no driver searching, Win7 just does it. Graphics during install. WebCam during install or on first plug, same with bluetooth, hard drive, dual-displays and phone.
His recounting of his experience has been mine *exactly*. Now, to be honest, my phone, while detected, needed to have it's Verizon software installed to actually *do* anything...but it was detected *as* my phone. Also, my printer is relatively new (HP AIO wireless). The older the hardware, the less likely the experience will be as seamless. Admittedly, my 5 year old HP laptop, while it runs it beautifully with even Aero installed, I did need to manually "update" (via windows Device Manager, not from a website) the video drivers on that one...but that was *it*.
Many folks have legitimate access to the RTM already. It can *easily* be transferred to USB for installation. There are now GUI tools out there for doing just that.
I have fully activated, legitimate installations of Windows 7 from USB flash, USB HDD, and from DVD running on probably 7 systems already. So far, installing from USB HDD seems to be the fastest (Clean install on a Dell Optiplex GX 740 took around 21 minutes from first boot for installation to desktop.)
Yes, we're testing the RTM here. We don't expect (and have yet to witness) any surprises vs. the RC and plan to be rolling it out early next year to most of our sites.
Spyware in and of itself is not illegal. A ton of applications gather information and report to their "home". This is perfectly legal as long as the user is informed. (Not aware...as most users are completely not, but at least given the opportunity to be aware)
So long as Microsoft has notified the user of the fact that data is transferred and what type of data is transferred, there's no legal recourse...the user was given the opportunity to be aware of the "spyware".
"Media Center does not recognize video in mkv containers"
Odd. I am ripping my 3rd DVD to H.264 in an mkv container as I type. The two I did previously play flawlessly.
I don't know if you are expecting Windows to do it OOB, and I don't know if it can or not. I install k-Lite (playback only) as one my first post-OOB installs.
Eventually we have to draw the line on responsibility here.
During installation of Windows, you are asked, specifically and explicitly, if you would like to enable "Automatic" updates or configure them manually.
Big window. Only one there. Hard to miss.
This window pops up even on OEM computers during OOBE.
At what point do we start blaming the users for missing the obvious, being naive, or simply not caring? Is it *really* Microsoft's fault they fail at reading one of maybe 4 questions they are asked during setup? Is it really Microsoft's fault they couldn't care less?
It's not like they couldn't simply use the same gameplay engine and provide multiple graphics engines. I would love to see engines designed specifically for low-end (netbook), mid-end (workstation), and high-end (Sli-rig), all optimized and tuned to give the very best of each (performance, balance, quality).
They've got plenty of funding, developers and experience to get this done.
Decreased hardware locks and user-mode scheduling alone made our DB guys drool a bit on the server-side of things. (both mentioned in the link above, follow the citation note to get details)...and why even bring up gaming? That's home-use. I couldn't care less about that...sorry.
Slashdot Mirror
Really....
Microsoft told you everyone upgrading from an older system would need to buy a new one?
Really? I call Bullshit. ...and the teenage guy at Wally World...now there's a veritable wealth of trustworthy and reliable information. I bet he gave you some good tips for getting rid of acne too...
The above commenter stated a new PC purchase was required. I provided a counter to that proving such was not the case.
Did I say everyone could do it? Nope.
Did I say it would not require any effort? Nope.
Did I imply anyone but myself would be able to accomplish such an amazing feat of technical know-how? Nope.
Thanks anyway.
Odd...
My HP ze2113 (circa 2005) runs Windows 7 (with Aero), MSE, and Office just fine. All I did was throw another 512MB RAM chip in it.
Where are you getting your data?
The studios are cutting off their own cash supply.
Right now, at least in the US, the scales are tipping. The folks that were raised with the VHS/DVD mentality are slipping under the "majority". The new majority doesn't want the DVDs. They realize they don't need to have the physical media, and don't care to "build a library" of movies they'll only watch once.
These people are *dying* to give the studios their money but are limited to options they do not care for.
These people are paying $20+ a month now for movies and TV shows that have been out for ages already on Netflix. These people would be giving that money directly to a studio-run group that offered new releases and "in season" TV programming. In a heartbeat. It's a no-brainer.
But no such group, no such site, no such service exists...much to our dismay.
We don't buy DVD's. We don't get "captured" by ratings. We wait. We wait for them to come out @ RedBox, or on Netflix, or Hulu... We wait to spend our money, and we end up spending less because we forget some of the movies we saw previews for that we would have watched, and we forget about shows that we don't have time to follow on TV....and when the radio stations stop playing the songs we liked...we've moved on as well.
The studios and labels could be getting this money and then some...NOW.
If they'd only pull their heads out of their asses long enough to watch us spend it elsewhere.
I subscribe to Netflix.
I subscribe to Pandora. ...and I am wondering when the studios and labels will decide *my* money is good enough for *them*. Until then, they'll see only a small percentage of what they *could* be getting from me.
God forbid they allow you to choose what you want to use to play back those movies in quicktime format. ...you did know there are other programs that can handle qt format videos just fine, right?
Funny stuff.
No, really.
"you might as well just bit-torrent"...
Bit Torrent rips still need to be cracked (or include cracks...which may or may not work for the foreseeable future, likely may not)
Bit Torrent rips may or may not be the untouched, unmodified, virus/malware-free copies available on TechNet (most likely not).
Bit torrent rip=MSFT gets nothing. TechNet=Microsoft gets ~$260 a year (depending on your ability to find "coupons")
Looks to me like TechNet is the best of all worlds. Activated copies from TechNet do not require cracks, certified downloads direct from Microsoft don't carry the very real possibility of being hacked copies stuffed with malware (go for the Windows is malware meme. Come on, we know you want to...), and Microsoft even gets a little something for their trouble.
Everybody wins. :)
...or allowing addons to be installed without asking? :)
So firefox allows a rogue addon to install without any user intervention and the story is all about how evil MSFT is?
Sure, they did it. Bad Microsoft.
But isn't the bigger issue that now that this is known....*anyone* can pull this on firefox users?
No. I am not apologizing for Microsoft. This was "Sony Stupid" of them. We're used to that here, though. What we're not used to (and apparently sweeping under the rug) is the massive, unholy hell of a mess mozilla's extension system for firefox is....
No, I think he means bottom of the barrel laptops sold circa 2005.
Google HP ze2113us.
XP ran like a dog on that, even after bringing the RAM upt o 1GB.
Vista won't run on it. At all.
Windows 7 Ultimate? Runs very well on it, thankyouverymuch.
(Single-Core CPU, 1GB RAM, ATi Mobility 200 GPU)
Not that I have verified that this is actually the wording, but:
"- use or run programs from the Premises that provide network content or any other services to anyone outside of your Premises LAN, except for personal and non-commercial residential use;"
"personal use" is defined as for your individual use. As others are connecting to your system and retrieving data from it, it is for your "personal" use...and the "personal" use of any of about a billion other people.
"Residential use" is a bit less strictly defined, but as you have no idea where that data from your P2P app is going, you're screwed regardless.
They are not the government, and as such, can shoot first and ask questions later (presuming guilt and shutting you down). Hell, they don't even have to ask questions later if they don't feel like it...
Sounds a lot like I am defending them, but in reality, I am just as annoyed by these things as most others are. I just am not out looking for excuse or rationalization regarding how I am right and they've got nothing on me.
I've seen to many people lose their internet (and not be able to sign up for the nearest competitor) or get sued to even think that I might remotely have any more or less of a chance at getting away with it than any of them did.
It's just not worth it.
"seed every ISO known to man at the same time.
I know that's probably not something Comcast is interested in supporting, but it's not against the ToS,"
Um, yes actually. It is. P2P acts to serve files to multiple recipients. This type of action is normally considered "serving". Comcast's ToS specifically disallows the use of Residential Internet Service for the purposes of running any type of server.
Credit shouldn't go to me, but rather to my IT group. I'd offer the compliment directly to them, but they already have enough ego issues. *grin*
"Admin rights are required on all the computers for access to active directory and such."
BZZT!
Access to AD only requires the *user* have admin rights, not the Computer.
Try this (has worked wonders for us):
Create two accounts for each user. One for day-today use, one for AD admin tasks. (Add AD in front of their username or some such) Secure their day-to-day as a limited user account. Lock the admin account down. Don't even give them proxy access or network share access.
Create a shortcut on their desktops (to dsa.msc, or whatever) and right-click it. Under properties/advanced, set it to run with alternate credentials.
Now, when they log into their day-to-day accounts, they can still open the dsa shortcut and enter i their "admin" account credentials to manage the AD, but now neither the AD account or their mornal day-to-day account will be capable of installing "AV2009".
Seriously, try it.
Problem solved.
They already have *guns*.
Seriously...would you rather they use those instead?
Can't wait! ...until then, I will continue to use the products the rest of the corporate world uses as long as they fit my needs.
I develop in Excel. More than just "speadsheets". I have no great ill or liking towards the ribbon, it is simply another means to the same end.
However, it does have some potential. The idea is sound (make the features utilized most easier to access), but they were too wide (or too narrow depending on how you look at it) in their interpretation.
They need to make it learn; make it customizable. So that the features *you* use most are easier to access....not the features the "lite" users access most frequently. They didn't allow for different types of users.
That said, I have high hopes from some of what I have heard regarding enhancements to the ribbon in O2KX that indicate a heading in that general direction.
The first funny thing is, these (80%) are people who got used to doing it with menus...because they work with excel all day.
The second funny thing is that the majority of Excel users are not advanced or even intermediate, but rather Customer Service Reps and the like who use it almost solely for keeping lists and such.
Microsoft is taking data from the majority of it's users. The majority of it's users happen to be novices. They have made it easier for them at the expense of the advanced/intermediate minority because they *figure* those few can actually figure it out regardless of the interface. (Ya know...keyboard shortcuts?)
"Unless Windows 7 has changed radically how drivers work under Windows, those usually require user installation on drivers. So, in different words, you're bullshitting."
Bull. Wireless NIC? Detected during install. Printer? If USB - detected during install. If Wireless/networked, detected through add-printer wizard...no driver searching, Win7 just does it. Graphics during install. WebCam during install or on first plug, same with bluetooth, hard drive, dual-displays and phone.
His recounting of his experience has been mine *exactly*. Now, to be honest, my phone, while detected, needed to have it's Verizon software installed to actually *do* anything...but it was detected *as* my phone. Also, my printer is relatively new (HP AIO wireless). The older the hardware, the less likely the experience will be as seamless. Admittedly, my 5 year old HP laptop, while it runs it beautifully with even Aero installed, I did need to manually "update" (via windows Device Manager, not from a website) the video drivers on that one...but that was *it*.
OpenSSH.
Ever heard of it? Vulnerable for *years*...
Of course, it wasn't the OS, but a 3rd party app...installed on almost *every* Linux PC in the world.
Ahem...
Warezed?
Many folks have legitimate access to the RTM already. It can *easily* be transferred to USB for installation. There are now GUI tools out there for doing just that.
I have fully activated, legitimate installations of Windows 7 from USB flash, USB HDD, and from DVD running on probably 7 systems already. So far, installing from USB HDD seems to be the fastest (Clean install on a Dell Optiplex GX 740 took around 21 minutes from first boot for installation to desktop.)
Yes, we're testing the RTM here. We don't expect (and have yet to witness) any surprises vs. the RC and plan to be rolling it out early next year to most of our sites.
Spyware in and of itself is not illegal. A ton of applications gather information and report to their "home". This is perfectly legal as long as the user is informed. (Not aware...as most users are completely not, but at least given the opportunity to be aware)
So long as Microsoft has notified the user of the fact that data is transferred and what type of data is transferred, there's no legal recourse...the user was given the opportunity to be aware of the "spyware".
"Media Center does not recognize video in mkv containers"
Odd. I am ripping my 3rd DVD to H.264 in an mkv container as I type. The two I did previously play flawlessly.
I don't know if you are expecting Windows to do it OOB, and I don't know if it can or not. I install k-Lite (playback only) as one my first post-OOB installs.
If you haven't, try that.
Riiiiight.
So, it's Microsoft's fault people don't update because it's an insecure Operating system. Uh-huh. Sure. Ok.
*backs away slowly*
Who's fault is it?
Eventually we have to draw the line on responsibility here.
During installation of Windows, you are asked, specifically and explicitly, if you would like to enable "Automatic" updates or configure them manually.
Big window. Only one there. Hard to miss.
This window pops up even on OEM computers during OOBE.
At what point do we start blaming the users for missing the obvious, being naive, or simply not caring? Is it *really* Microsoft's fault they fail at reading one of maybe 4 questions they are asked during setup? Is it really Microsoft's fault they couldn't care less?
It's not like they couldn't simply use the same gameplay engine and provide multiple graphics engines. I would love to see engines designed specifically for low-end (netbook), mid-end (workstation), and high-end (Sli-rig), all optimized and tuned to give the very best of each (performance, balance, quality).
They've got plenty of funding, developers and experience to get this done.
...
This has already been done to death.
For the basics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_7
Decreased hardware locks and user-mode scheduling alone made our DB guys drool a bit on the server-side of things. (both mentioned in the link above, follow the citation note to get details) ...and why even bring up gaming? That's home-use. I couldn't care less about that...sorry.