This site (http://share.seadragon.com/demos/ChronoZoom/firstgeneration.html) provides a graphical view and timeline of the history of the universe. To get a sense of the place human history has in the greater scheme of things, click on the 'Human History' link near the top of the page to zoom in.
Before you flame me, this requires Silverlight but it's worth it. Besides, Silverlight is a quick install on Macs and PCs and you can always uninstall afterwards.
Are joking or just dumb? The stock price of a company means nothing in an absolute sense. Microsoft stock has split nine times since their IPO. Withou splits, Microsoft would be valued at about $235 today. Goggle has never split. More important, what matters is the share price x total number of outstanding shares. That's how you calculate total market cap. Today, investors think Microsoft is worth $215 billion. They think Google is worth $177 billion. P.S. Investors also think that Google is worth $26.40 LESS today than they did yesterday. Food for thought.
That is a reference to Microsoft's consumer facing online services such as Bing, MSN and Windows Live. Most if not all of the losses are from Bing, where Microsoft is investing heavily to try to compete with the 10,000 pound gorilla of search-Google.
You take Google's web page at face value? Try to get them on record with two questions about any well-known company on their list.
1. What percent of the users in the organizations use Google apps regularly?
2. What percent of the users use Microsoft Office regularly?
They won't answer because (1) in most of those companies only a small number of employees use Google Apps on avregular basis and (2) almost all of them use Office also.
The kicker? Most of the companies Google trots out as good customers are using free versions of Google Apps.
Did you even bother to read anything? Google logs keystrokes even if you don't hit enter. That's different than your DNS server knowing when you hit 'enter' on a search term or go to a Web site.
Insightful my ass. There is a big difference: IE DOES NOT log your keystrokes. Chrome does. Whether or not they suggest search results is irrelevant.
If you think Microsoft is lying about their privacy policy then you're in tinfoil hat land. Microsoft may be many things but they're not dumb. They made major mistakes 10 years ago and are still paying for it. You think they'd risk lying in their privacy policy? They'd get caught eventually.
Your post is such total BS I can barely contain myself. So, you've actually checked out the source code for Chrome? I didn't think so. Whether or not Chrome is standards compliant is totally irrelevant to this discussion. Your trust in the 'community' is laughable. The facts are actually not disputed. Chrome logs keystrokes when you type anything into the address/search bar. That's it. Whether they anonymize them after 24 hours or not does not change that fact. IE does not do that. That's not disputed.
Wake up.
Um...wrong. IE does not log keystrokes on the address bar AT ALL and also doesn't log keystrokes on the search bar unless the user hit 'enter.' So if you type 'How to kill my wife' in Chrome and think better of it and hit backspace...Google knows anyway. If you do the same in the search box in IE, Microsoft knows nothing.
PC's running Windows 7 with optimized BIOS set-up boot quickly but really, who cold boots a PC much anymore? I usually put mine in hibernation and it 'wakes' within about 10 seconds tops.
Of course, even Vista sold more units in its first month or two of existance than all of the PC's that have ever run Linux (excluding servers). Everything is relative.
Not really. My mom and pop - aged 79 and 76 - use Microsoft Word and Excel, Quicken, Turbo Tax and Photoshop Elements and several other PC applications. Yes, there are Web-based versions of most of those products but they don't work as well and only work when online (still). A relatively small number of wealthier people will buy Chrome OS devices as a 2nd, 3rd or 4th machine but they'll continue to use PC's and Macs for everything else.
Within months we'll start hearing:
1. Low-end users - those who don't generally works at desks - will be the primary users of Google Apps.
2. Most of their desk workers will continue to use Microsoft Office. They'll use Google Apps for email and sharing Word, Excel and PowerPoint docs.
3. The total cost of this move will probably be higher than using on-premises mail servers or using servers.
4. There will be another GMail/Google Docs outage that will piss people off.
And, I'd say there's a 50-60% chance that they'll back off this experiment within a year or two and use Google Apps in a much more limited way.
Dvorak is pissed that Microsoft PR flacks no longer kiss his ass. He's irrelevant and knows it. If Microsoft assigned a personal PR person to him he'd undoubtedly change his tune. I wouldn't if I were them.
Have you actually used Windows 7? Apparently not. I have Win7 running on a $400 acer netbook with an Intel Atom processor, 2 gigs of RAM and plain vanilla on-board video and it runs just fine.
This is modded funny? Really? This is just another of the un-original and un-interesting thoughts shared on/. Have you ever actually had an original thought? How about I lower the bar - originality is hard. Have you actually had a thought that had not already been expressed less than 10,000 times on/. in the last year? In this case...no.
If 6 in 10 business have no plans to deploy Windows 7 in the next year is bad news then I want some of that! Let's see...what would the comparable headlines be?
9.9 in 10 businesses have no plan to deploy Linux (desktop)in the next year!
9.4 in 10 businesses have no plans to deploy MacOS in the next year!
Microsoft would undoubtedly be thrilled if 4 in 10 businesses deployed Windows 7 in the next year. Any other software company in the world would be thrilled with that result.
Time to move along.
Why would IBM and Cisco be better positioned than Microsoft in the cloud? That makes no sense. Microsoft is still the leading or one of the leading developer platform providers. 10's of thousands of companies and millions of developers use Microsoft frameworks and tools for software development. Yes, there are lots of great alternatives (Java, Php, Ruby etc. etc. etc.) and that's a good thing. But all things being equal I'd probabyl rather be Microsoft right now than pretty much any other company trying to establsh itself in the cloud except perhaps Amazon and Google. In addition to the developer platform assets, they have the capital to build lots of big/expensive datacenters, the network of partners/ISV's who use their platforms and lots of mindshare. IBM, from what I can tell, is essentially just doing the same thing they've been doing forever - offering good but expensive outsourcing services for very large businesses who have too much money to spend.
That's/. for you. I'd go further: I'd venture that more people have bought more than one copy of Vista than have ever used Linux on the client.;) Think of all of the people who have bought more than one PC since Vista shipped.
It's pretty low class of MLB to slam Silverlight. Flash and Silverlight both have strengths. Flash's biggest strengths are ubiquity and a fairly large number of "developers" who know how to use it. Flash's weaknesses is that it's a hariball with no real programming model. Silverlight's strengths is that it's a real platform - an extension of.NET - with good and improving tooling support and huge numbers of potential developers who know.NET. Silverlight's weaknesses are tjat it is not yet on as many machines as Flash (but it will eventually...Microsoft won't give up) and that it's just more immature. For MLB to throw around innuendo about the performance or reliability of Silverlight is low class and obviously not credible given how well Silverlight worked for the Olympics, NCAA's and in many other places.
If I were Adobe I'd be worried. Flash will lead for a while longer but Silverlight is fundamentally better as a platform and Microsoft won't give up.
Slashdot Mirror
This site (http://share.seadragon.com/demos/ChronoZoom/firstgeneration.html) provides a graphical view and timeline of the history of the universe. To get a sense of the place human history has in the greater scheme of things, click on the 'Human History' link near the top of the page to zoom in. Before you flame me, this requires Silverlight but it's worth it. Besides, Silverlight is a quick install on Macs and PCs and you can always uninstall afterwards.
Are joking or just dumb? The stock price of a company means nothing in an absolute sense. Microsoft stock has split nine times since their IPO. Withou splits, Microsoft would be valued at about $235 today. Goggle has never split. More important, what matters is the share price x total number of outstanding shares. That's how you calculate total market cap. Today, investors think Microsoft is worth $215 billion. They think Google is worth $177 billion. P.S. Investors also think that Google is worth $26.40 LESS today than they did yesterday. Food for thought.
Are you just inept? I have had no problems syncing hotmail with an iPhone, Droid or Windows phones.
That is a reference to Microsoft's consumer facing online services such as Bing, MSN and Windows Live. Most if not all of the losses are from Bing, where Microsoft is investing heavily to try to compete with the 10,000 pound gorilla of search-Google.
You take Google's web page at face value? Try to get them on record with two questions about any well-known company on their list. 1. What percent of the users in the organizations use Google apps regularly? 2. What percent of the users use Microsoft Office regularly? They won't answer because (1) in most of those companies only a small number of employees use Google Apps on avregular basis and (2) almost all of them use Office also. The kicker? Most of the companies Google trots out as good customers are using free versions of Google Apps.
Did you even bother to read anything? Google logs keystrokes even if you don't hit enter. That's different than your DNS server knowing when you hit 'enter' on a search term or go to a Web site.
Insightful my ass. There is a big difference: IE DOES NOT log your keystrokes. Chrome does. Whether or not they suggest search results is irrelevant. If you think Microsoft is lying about their privacy policy then you're in tinfoil hat land. Microsoft may be many things but they're not dumb. They made major mistakes 10 years ago and are still paying for it. You think they'd risk lying in their privacy policy? They'd get caught eventually.
Your post is such total BS I can barely contain myself. So, you've actually checked out the source code for Chrome? I didn't think so. Whether or not Chrome is standards compliant is totally irrelevant to this discussion. Your trust in the 'community' is laughable. The facts are actually not disputed. Chrome logs keystrokes when you type anything into the address/search bar. That's it. Whether they anonymize them after 24 hours or not does not change that fact. IE does not do that. That's not disputed. Wake up.
Um...wrong. IE does not log keystrokes on the address bar AT ALL and also doesn't log keystrokes on the search bar unless the user hit 'enter.' So if you type 'How to kill my wife' in Chrome and think better of it and hit backspace...Google knows anyway. If you do the same in the search box in IE, Microsoft knows nothing.
PC's running Windows 7 with optimized BIOS set-up boot quickly but really, who cold boots a PC much anymore? I usually put mine in hibernation and it 'wakes' within about 10 seconds tops.
Or, why not spend $300 on a netbook running Windows 7 which supports any Web app and 10's of thousands of PC apps?
Of course, even Vista sold more units in its first month or two of existance than all of the PC's that have ever run Linux (excluding servers). Everything is relative.
Not really. My mom and pop - aged 79 and 76 - use Microsoft Word and Excel, Quicken, Turbo Tax and Photoshop Elements and several other PC applications. Yes, there are Web-based versions of most of those products but they don't work as well and only work when online (still). A relatively small number of wealthier people will buy Chrome OS devices as a 2nd, 3rd or 4th machine but they'll continue to use PC's and Macs for everything else.
So Google has a few thousand customers - most of whom are also using Microsoft Office - and Microsoft is dead? Ok then...
Within months we'll start hearing: 1. Low-end users - those who don't generally works at desks - will be the primary users of Google Apps. 2. Most of their desk workers will continue to use Microsoft Office. They'll use Google Apps for email and sharing Word, Excel and PowerPoint docs. 3. The total cost of this move will probably be higher than using on-premises mail servers or using servers. 4. There will be another GMail/Google Docs outage that will piss people off. And, I'd say there's a 50-60% chance that they'll back off this experiment within a year or two and use Google Apps in a much more limited way.
Dvorak is pissed that Microsoft PR flacks no longer kiss his ass. He's irrelevant and knows it. If Microsoft assigned a personal PR person to him he'd undoubtedly change his tune. I wouldn't if I were them.
Have you actually used Windows 7? Apparently not. I have Win7 running on a $400 acer netbook with an Intel Atom processor, 2 gigs of RAM and plain vanilla on-board video and it runs just fine.
Microsoft has already implemented this in Bing (www.bing.com/twitter/) and Google is just announcing...vaporwarwe? That's sort of funny.
This is modded funny? Really? This is just another of the un-original and un-interesting thoughts shared on /. Have you ever actually had an original thought? How about I lower the bar - originality is hard. Have you actually had a thought that had not already been expressed less than 10,000 times on /. in the last year? In this case...no.
If 6 in 10 business have no plans to deploy Windows 7 in the next year is bad news then I want some of that! Let's see...what would the comparable headlines be? 9.9 in 10 businesses have no plan to deploy Linux (desktop)in the next year! 9.4 in 10 businesses have no plans to deploy MacOS in the next year! Microsoft would undoubtedly be thrilled if 4 in 10 businesses deployed Windows 7 in the next year. Any other software company in the world would be thrilled with that result. Time to move along.
Why would IBM and Cisco be better positioned than Microsoft in the cloud? That makes no sense. Microsoft is still the leading or one of the leading developer platform providers. 10's of thousands of companies and millions of developers use Microsoft frameworks and tools for software development. Yes, there are lots of great alternatives (Java, Php, Ruby etc. etc. etc.) and that's a good thing. But all things being equal I'd probabyl rather be Microsoft right now than pretty much any other company trying to establsh itself in the cloud except perhaps Amazon and Google. In addition to the developer platform assets, they have the capital to build lots of big/expensive datacenters, the network of partners/ISV's who use their platforms and lots of mindshare. IBM, from what I can tell, is essentially just doing the same thing they've been doing forever - offering good but expensive outsourcing services for very large businesses who have too much money to spend.
That's /. for you. I'd go further: I'd venture that more people have bought more than one copy of Vista than have ever used Linux on the client. ;) Think of all of the people who have bought more than one PC since Vista shipped.
I'd bet $1000 that more people have DOWNGRADED from Vista to Windows XP than have ever used Linux as a client OS.
Is it just me or is the Linux Foundation site not working? Hmm... They must be running Windows Server. ;)
It's pretty low class of MLB to slam Silverlight. Flash and Silverlight both have strengths. Flash's biggest strengths are ubiquity and a fairly large number of "developers" who know how to use it. Flash's weaknesses is that it's a hariball with no real programming model. Silverlight's strengths is that it's a real platform - an extension of .NET - with good and improving tooling support and huge numbers of potential developers who know .NET. Silverlight's weaknesses are tjat it is not yet on as many machines as Flash (but it will eventually...Microsoft won't give up) and that it's just more immature. For MLB to throw around innuendo about the performance or reliability of Silverlight is low class and obviously not credible given how well Silverlight worked for the Olympics, NCAA's and in many other places.
If I were Adobe I'd be worried. Flash will lead for a while longer but Silverlight is fundamentally better as a platform and Microsoft won't give up.