Microsoft's next version of Windows will ship with "tons of security features," including one that automatically scans boot drives for malware and a revamped version of the Windows Defender antivirus program, company executives said. At the company's BUILD conference in Anaheim, California on Tuesday, Corporate Vice President …
That's all very nice, I'm sure ...
... but what can I do productively with Windows 8 that I couldn't do with DOS 5.0 and DesqView, on an i386sx16 (with math-co), 4 megs of RAM and a 40Meg harddrive?
That's a serious question, and one that Mr. Angiulo and the rest of Microsoft's top brass seem to be forgetting. And also why I haven't used or worked on or recommended anything Microsoft-based since the end of 2009. Too big & bulky; too much glitter; too much "the user has no need to know", etc. etc.
Well you stick to your DOS 5.0. Who is forcing you to change?
Let us know how far you get ;o)
40MB? I have pictures larger than that. Also, I frequently watch movies on optical disks that could swallow your 40MB HDD a thousand times over. If a 386 is all you need, then fine, but most of us moved on a long time ago.
I also play games that need lots of processing power as well as multiple GB of hard drive space and I work with multi-GB datasets.
A serious question would be why is Win8 sufficiently better than Win7 that people should make the switch. Though, most people just use the OS that comes preinstalled on their new machine and don't care much about the version number.
You say that like its a proud boast
Efficient computing isn't a dick-waving contest. More isn't necessarily better. In fact, usually its a symptom of laissez-faire laziness.
The Hubble has a 486 processor. That was after an upgrade.
I have pictures bigger than 40 megs myself. They are stored on my SAN, and cropped and color corrected (etc.) on a dedicated image processing computer, Slackware based, with only the bare bones necessary software installed. My Wife's minimal video needs (horse sales, mostly) are handled quite nicely on an original 256Meg iMac, running an aging, stripped down variation of YellowDog. Neither are "general purpose computers", nor should they be. Only stands to reason ... Hardware is cheap-to-free, and really good OSes are free.
Games and movies aren't exactly productive, which was an integral part of the question. Agree that "most people" just blindly use what Marketing tells them to use. They are interface users, not computer users.
 I use an aging Hasselblad with a CF39 back, when I'm not teaching my nieces & nephews the delights of B&W film ...
 No, I didn't purchase it myself; I'm not prone to that kind of narcissism. It was my Wife's gift to me on our 10th wedding anniversary. To say I was floored would be the world's biggest understatement :-)
The Hubble is a camera!!!
Its got very little processing power because A: it doesnt need it and B:its less weight and less to go wrong.
Your point is invalid. My watch has more raw power than the hubble but it cant take pictures like the hubble can.
Actually, I use a stripped down version of Slackware for my day-to-day computing needs. I only install the software I actually use. It works quite nicely. But I could use DOS 5.0 to do the same thing, if I wanted ... I just prefer a unix-style solution.
All my businesses are profitable (except my fledgling brewery, which should turn a profit in a year or two, and the tack store, which will always operate at a loss ... ).
Re:You say that like its a proud boast
"The Hubble has a 486 processor. That was after an upgrade."
The moon landing was done using XT processor technology, IIRC, but that is only possible for dedicated tasks and a simple OS. Neither of these pieces of kit are designed to carry out the multitasking, multimedia tasks that a modern machine does. You may want to describe it as dick waving, but you miss the point in so doing.
If you love this old kit - and I started out on punch cards BTW, so perhaps that explains my perspective - then you knock yourself out. You won't achieve as much as other people do, but that's something you'll have to learn the hard way.
Re: That's all very nice, I'm sure ...
"... but what can I do productively with Windows 8 that I couldn't do with DOS 5.0 and DesqView, on an i386sx16 (with math-co), 4 megs of RAM and a 40Meg harddrive?"
Many of my audio files are three or more times that size; because I have 4 Tb on my main HDs I don't even bother to calculate. Also with DOS paste linking is not possible, so just how I am going to edit my graphs in the original package with the pastes being auto updated? Meanwhile, back at the PIM, an alarm is going missing in DOS, because it does not multi task that way... ...and doing VOIP whilst I'm editing those SPSS graphs, or some other massive audio or graphic file? No way, so there won't be a collaborative effort with someone a few thousand miles away. Likewise how do my AV et al. auto update, and what about DOS itself?
Don't misunderstand me; I enjoyed DOS 3 x, Windows 2 x, and I grew up with what was happening. It was marvellous. I do not have a rose tinted perspective of the past though. I can remember wishing it was possible to do a variety of things that I now take for granted. It's over, although I do have a number of DOS packages and can boot up from a USB stick that is several hundred times the size of the largest HD I could use with DOS (oh yes, remember that limitation? Remember UMB?) As I type these lines I remember the difficulty I experienced in trimming my HD so that it was not over populated; as DOS progressed, I remember compressing my HD so that I could squeeze more in to my (by then) 500 Mb HD (I started off with a 32 Mb HD, and had a 720 Kb floppy drive that worked if I put the appropriate Drivparms statement in my config.sys). And Doom on a 486 DX, with 4 Mb RAM and 1 Mb video RAM (the hardware of the time was dictated by the contemporary demand)? Get outta here.
No, I'm not going back there, but you can. There are plenty of downloadable DOS packages, right down to DR-DOS, which was a favourite of mine. Knock yourself out.
Hey if it works, then fair play to you, that's a pretty mean feat to keep that going. To all those ragging on jake, take a moment think where your priorities and interests lie and think where they may go next.
When I was young and dopey I chased the bleeding edge. I had to have the fastest machine I could build with the latest O/S, huge memory and big disks. One day, 8 years ago, my little girl suddenly arrived on the scene and all that stuff didn't seem to matter anymore. My priorities changed almost instantly.
Everyone has different prioriities in life, I no longer care much about machines at home. I have couple of NAS's for dumping stuff, a couple of old iMacs the family use and a CentOS box for media streaming. My desktop is now a 3 year old, second-hand iMac, my only hobby,when I get time, is digital photography. I have a 3 year old iPhone 3G my wife gave me when she got a new phone, it's good enough for me.
The only thing that makes me laugh is that the R&D dept my company has only just finished the Windows7 eval and testing, getting ready to roll out. They may play with Win8 but I can't see that after 9 months of testing Win7 they will be in hurry to start running all those user tests again!
I always enjoy the release of a new O/S though! The fervour of the fans, the ad's gearing up to make the sell, the big build up to the launch day. Then sitting back reading the rabid fans on forums defending theirs and attacking the other guy's O/S, helps pass the lunchtime at work!
"The moon landing was done using XT processor technology, IIRC"
You remember wrong. The AGC was built by Raytheon a decade and a half before the XT. Wiki (which I almost never cite, for somewht obvious reasons) has a fairly good overview:
"You won't achieve as much as other people do"
::heh:: ... Actually, knowing how to surgically apply which tool, where, and when, rather than throwing the kitchen sink at each and every problem, has allowed me to achieve more than most.
God is an iron ...
I don't see anyone ragging on me.
I do see several people who can't read for context.
My question was "what can I do productively with Windows 8 that I couldn't do with DOS 5.0 and DesqView" ... Keyword "productively".
A modern PC ...
Has many orders of magnitude the power that a desktop had twenty years ago ... BUT
a) a Word file still takes the same length of time to type and save
b) individual productivity is less now than it was twenty years ago.
Only difference is storage is both cheap and plentiful and processors are insanely fast. They HAVE to be to deal with the bloat in modern operating systems.
All that power. All that speed. To completely no advantage. It isn't being leveraged. That was jake's original point.
Go easy, jake
I don't think these kids can read.
My stepdad ...
Was a Raytheon engineer at the time ... he worked with Westinghouse on some of the later FBW adaptions of AGC -- this was how I got into computing. I was learning maths and transistor logic from him at age 12.
The Hubble doesn't drop film canisters,
it ships packets processed from CCD collectors. Therefore more processing power is better. the newer processors don't necessarily mass more than a 486. In the cold temperatures of space, cooling new processors is probably easier. There may be less to go wrong, but the engineering on chips, unlike certain OSes, is pretty solid. Granted, it probably makes more sense to add RAM before boosting processing power for the Hubble, but that sort of makes his original point: the device should be engineered to the specs required for the job. PCs these days are lots of glitz to have the latest bloatware features. Now, I love my bloatware, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize that it IS bloatware.
Indeed I do. Later machines used XT chips, which I remembered having posted prior to fully engaging my CNS .
However, and to drive my point home (this was edited and lost in Firefox so I'm now using a text editor within a multitasking environment) - I started off using a punch card system, moved on to DOS and was pissed off by its failings, especially when I had to use SPSS DOS to instruct Harvard Graphics to draw and save a graph from my neurophysiology research (you'll know the CPL and CPS restrictions were inherited from the punchcard's physical limitations), and to refine the instructions repeatedly over such a slow, cumbersome and unrelated system, whereas now I use SPSS Win to draw and export a graph to the clipboard/save it to a native format, paste into a document and, if I've done it properly (easy) it will update as my sample (and thus my data) expands, and with no effort my document is updated.
Kitchen sink? Please. I use a pallette to the bottom left of my screen whether Linux or Windows, and I can do other things at the same time; I do not use a kitchen sink, but rather select appropriate tools as and when I need them, without having to abandon a task, because I am mutiltasking.
Rather than iron I use stainless steel or even platinum. God? I am an atheist, and my qualifications in neuroscience inform this. Hah.
Difficult to Answer
As Windows 8 is not out, depends what you mean by "productively" as DesqView and DOS 5 are so ancient I have serious problem knowing what you could with such OSs. You would certainly have a problem using the internet unless you just like text. I don't think there is a web browser You would only be able to connect to the internet via SLIP or PPP.
I doubt you could record sound.
Printing colour would be very difficult. Inserting pictures into text documents? Possible but not easy. .Creating web pages would be tricky. No web browser.
You wouldn't be able to make a powerpoint presentation.
Modern PCs and OSs make people far more productive certainly in work. Ask any Secretary or PA.
Your whole set up sounds eccentric. If you have been using it for donkeys years and it satisfies your requirements then good for you. You cannot enjoy the pleasures of 21st century web browsing, video, music and other what you call non-productive tasks, but then maybe you don't want to,
Windows7 is a lot more useful than DOS and a lot more fun!!
For "kitchen sink", kindly read "shovelware". Windows, OSX, Ubuntu, whatever ... anything that attempts to be all things to all people falls under this umbrella. As in "everything, including the kitchen sink".
The "God is an iron" comment is a Spider Robinson quote ... "if a glutton practices gluttony, god is an iron".
I'm not an atheist, I'm agnostic.
 If you haven't read the "Callahan's" series, stop everything & head for your library.
In lieu of multiple responses, I'll reply to Syntax Error ...
"depends what you mean by "productively""
Uh ... getting useful work done?
"DesqView and DOS 5 are so ancient I have serious problem knowing what you could with such OSs."
So why offer up an opinion?
"You would certainly have a problem using the internet"
No. I was using TehIntraWebTubes before Microsoft existed ...
"unless you just like text."
That's a problem in your mind? 99% of the useful content available online is text. Seriously, think about it ...
"I don't think there is a web browser"
There was (and is); it's called "lynx" ... Once HTTP became common, anyway. Prior to that, we used telnet and ftp, for the most part.
"You would only be able to connect to the internet via SLIP or PPP."
Today, I use a modem to connect to TehIntraWebTubes about one week a month, at 9600 baud on a good day. Most days it's more like 2400 or 1200. Fort Bragg, CA weather & an ailing cable plant make for a piss-poor signal/noise ratio.
"I doubt you could record sound."
Yes, I could record & edit sound. In stereo, even.
"Printing colour would be very difficult."
CMYK dot matrix printers were available.
"Inserting pictures into text documents? Possible but not easy."
PageMaker made that almost laughable easy.
"Creating web pages would be tricky. No web browser."
The WWW was very young in this time-frame. It was pretty much all text (kinda like Gopher). Everything was created using a text editor. And guess what? All of those pages are STILL readable (if they still exist). Unlike some stuff created with so-called "modern"' software that exists to lock consumers into corporate advertising bullshit, thus locking out people who refuse to conform.
"You wouldn't be able to make a powerpoint presentation."
Cry me a river. As a consultant who is brought in to fix b0rken c0rporate c0mputing, one of the first things I do is fire the middle management who claim (on a survey I provide) to "rely on powerpoint". Powerpoint has wasted more meeting hours ($$$) than any other bit of corporate bullshit that I can think of ... That said, read up on "Aldus Persuasion".
"Ask any Secretary"
Ask any secretary who worked with a Displaywriter if a current Microsoft-based system is better. But get ready to duck, you'll probably get slapped.
"Your whole set up sounds eccentric."
"You cannot enjoy the pleasures of 21st century web browsing"
Yes, I can. My main box is Slack-current. Horses for courses and all that.
I have dedicated video gear. Including production.
I have a dedicated sound system. Including production.
"and other what you call non-productive tasks"
Are they productive, or entertainment? If entertainment, are they really required at work?
"but then maybe you don't want to"
I don't think you really grasp my point ...
"Windows7 is a lot more useful than DOS"
Post proof, or stop regurgitating Microsoft's marketing babble.
"and a lot more fun!!"
Ah. Glitter rules, then. Sorry, bub, I use these tools to make a living ...
Proof that Windows 7 is more useful than DOS?
My mum, my niece (4yo) and many other non-computer professionals can use Windows 7, they found it very hard or impossible to use DOS.
Or: More people use Windows 7 therefore it's of use to more people than DOS, therefore it's more useful than DOS.
A billion flyes can´t be wrong! Go, give it a taste!
You do realise that you are, still, missing his point. Don´t you?
Printing in colour? Jeez ...
I was hand-editing colour-separated PostScript files in 1990 on a DOS PC and sending them to a PostScript printer or Monotype imagesetter ...
COPY THIS.PS LTP1:
I was also able to check them first (to make sure they would actually work) by using GhostScript to give me a beautiful full-colour preview -- this also in DOS. Also used an identical process on a UNIX workstation -- which I also used to digitise fonts.
I also had eMail (command line based natch and still do prefer it this way) and today I still regularly use lynx -- and when I *do* use a graphical browser I tend to use Readability to just show my the plain text content of the page without all the peripheral shit around it.
All this and infinitely more was possible on a 386 with 8Mb memory and a 40 (later 80) Mb hard disk. I also actually used to write Windows programs IN DOS because that was the ONLY WAY to DO IT for years. Native compilers running under Windows didn't even exist.
I would say these were the most productive computer-using years of my life.
Me DearOldMum (mid-70s and computer incompetent) & Great Aunt (late 90s and computer illiterate) use a version of Slackware that I provided for them. Their support calls have dropped from several times per month for software issues with MS products, to once or twice a year for hardware issues.
My 9 nieces and nephews (two families, aged roughly 4 to just over 14) all use a similar variation of Slackware. The eldest found a "free" Celeron-based PC and managed to install her own copy (from my install DVD) without any help from myself or her parents. Including networking & printing. Her brother (barely 13) is in the process of figuring it out for himself with a blank computer I provided when my brother asked if I had any spares I could "donate".
The "more is always better" argument falls flat on it's face if you take note of the lard-asses who subsist on fast-food here in the USofA ...
I have a feeling that "productively" for you means office apps like wordperfect for DOS :)) You know so people's needs go beyond typing documents. I for instance need synchronization of documents with my coworkers and versioning (Office 2008), access to ERP and reporting software (powered by hopefully a fast database preferably not stored in a file on my DOS system but somewhere where my colleagues can access too - even those working in other locations then me), need some CRM software preferably integrated with our voip phone system. My colleagues at marketing also need a powerful image editing software, email applications (not text only!!!) to be able to send drafts of their work, etc.
As for other people, "productive" applications also tend to include engineering design applications (and please don't tell me AutoCAD R12 for DOS because at today's standards there isn't much you can do with it), architectural design applications, simulators, etc. Most of these tasks couldn't be done with the software or hardware available in that period. Without them we'd all just be living 80s-90s, without all the technological advancements done since. If we are at it, why don't we just give up technology entirely and live caves like we used to, right?
"I have a feeling that "productively" for you means office apps like wordperfect for DOS :))"
No, "productivity" means running my businesses without the computers getting in the way.
"I for instance need synchronization of documents with my coworkers and versioning"
We were doing that with UNIX[tm] back in 1973.
"access to ERP"
My granddaughter erped on me a couple hours ago ... and in my mind, that was far more useful than so-called "enterprise resource planning" ...
"need some CRM software preferably integrated with our voip phone system."
Ah, I see. You're a marketard. You've drunk the coolaid. Poor bastard.
CAD systems & the like should be dedicated systems, and use whatever hardware, OSes, and software are required to run said systems. This kind of kit is specialized, not common-or-garden desktops. Or should be.
Side-note: I still use ACAD for DOS, it manages my Ranch infrastructure quite nicely. I drew the place up in it, I made changes to those plans in it, and I continue to document changes in it. Why do you have issues with this?
Cooling in space is harder
No air to blow over things.
Video wouldn't play with NoScript in firefox so...
Started downloading it with DownloadHelper. Stopped after the 2GB mark (unknown max file size). I'm interested in Windows 8, but not 2GB interested.
No you do not understand
You can format your disk with fat, fat32, exfat, ntfs. None of those are a function of the OS except that M$ includes one or the other in various 'versions' (starter, home, pro, ent, give-me-a-break-the-shit-is-too-deep) of it's OS. Some file systems support big files, others do not.
The only real advances M$ has made in approx 17 years was (1) 32 bit support [Win95], (2) pre-emptive multitasking [NT], (3) 64 bit support [XP 64].
Everything else has been Window-dressing.
Impressed so far
This looks very promising I have to admit.
"Windows 8 to ship with built-in malware"
That was how Google Reader displayed the article name for me. Somehow, I was not surprised.
I think MetroWare is a much better description :-)
I don't want tons of security features
I just want a simple security model that works behind the scenes that I don;'t even need to know about.
Security is one are where less is more. Joe Sixpack does not want to learn how to use tons of features to secure their system. Any system that has tons of features won't work because it won't be used properly.
Tons of security features?
You seem to think that "Joe Sixpack" has to learn how to use tons of features to secure their system. While I wouldn't wish to comment on the effectiveness of Windows Firewall, Windows Defender and Microsoft Security Essentials, the first two come with the OS and MSE is a download from the MS website. None of them require the user to have to learn to use tons of features, in fact they need minimal interaction from the user at all, other than during operation, asking the odd question of you regarding whether you wish to allow an action that the products have detected might have questionable consequences.
MS make great efforts to ensure their OS's and products are as painless as possible to use for end users. While the IT crowd might argue against what they see as the dumbing down of operating systems and the hiding of the nuts and bolts, there is little doubt in my mind that the average end user just wants it all to work, in the same way as they want the TV to just work, and I fully expect Windows 8 to be a positive iteration of Windows 7 in that many things will work very well, without tying up the average user in endless configuration questions that they do not wish to even begin to try and understand.
We live in an age where computer technology is sold in the same way as all other consumer technology is sold - i.e. you can turn it on and it just works. There is a reason why Apple do so well for example, and it is not just down to marketing. It is because they can deliver products to the consumer that the consumer feels just work out of the box and are simple to use. Why would we criticise MS for doing the same thing. I look forward to Windows 8, confident that it will be a refinement of Windows 7, which is already a relatively painless OS to use.
...well clearly you have not used a Windows product for sometime.
I've never really had to touch or modify 99% of them and Windows Essentials must be one the most simple ones to set up and install going.
I just wish they'd do some work on the registry ! it's (becomes) bloated & inefficient, and I have to wonder how much it is required!! it should be only for the operating system itself, it's not 100% required for installing programs! The operating system does virtually no updating of the registry when files are moved, uninstalled, deleted etc etc - these should at least be recorded in a temp directory, and a registry update should be performed either at a set time, or on system shut-down. This is an area that is in serious need of a complete makeover!
Though ha~ that might bring an end to all those registry cleaners/optimisers/fixers that generally do little to improve anything, and can cause major problems.
Well, friend, UNIX has survived since about 1975 using text files for almost all it's config. So I'm gonna say the registry is not strictly speaking needed.
"Well, friend, UNIX has survived since about 1975 using text files for almost all it's config. So I'm gonna say the registry is not strictly speaking needed."
I remember .ini files. Oops! They're still there, so I find myself wondering in a circular pattern; the registry is easier to protect and so on. Hmm.
Except that based on the way malware re-writes the registry
it seems it isn't actually easier to protect. So maybe it would be better if the ini files were still the primary configuration location and you could just copy a good one from a known trusted location.
Oops, that migh frackup the DRM that prevent pirating, never mind.
Re: Except that based on the way malware re-writes the registry
Hence my cautious comments, in which I implied a circular argument. Rather than go that way, whereas in saving some problems others were caused, wanna buy a good HIPS and a good registry protector?
"You choose the picture – and the gestures you use with it – to create a password that's uniquely yours."
Isn't that the whole point of *any* type of password?
' ""You choose the picture – and the gestures you use with it – to create a password that's uniquely yours."
Isn't that the whole point of *any* type of password? '
All passwords are equal, but MS passwords are more equal than others?
Wait for the 'tards...
This is encouraging, but wait for the brainless comments to follow...
Ha! If MSFT had produced a secure OS in the first place, SYMC would have never grown into the company it is today.
"Microsoft is not a security company. Security is important, but it's just a little part of Microsoft," Arno Edelmann, Microsoft Business Security Product Manager, as reported on ZDNet.
name one secure OS. Just one. I'll wait.
Secure OSes? TOPS-10, TOPS-20 and VMS spring to mind. Yes, I run all three.
OS/390 and zOS are fairly decent. Hell, OS/2 (ecomstation, these days) is better than any other consumer-grade OS that I can think of ...
It easier to name insecure one: MS Windows. Let's see, microsoft.com strongly recommends an AV on all of its desktops and servers. Redhat or Debian do not, except for the Windows clients...
None of these are secure once connected to the Internet. For example, VMS passwords can be bruteforced in under twenty hours. In general, a VAX is reasonably secure, but only because it tends to be an isolated box.
And you think that's responsible behaviour, do you?
You're in Marketing, right?
I'll assume you're typing at me ... There is a reason we invented titles.
ANYway ... You can't brute-force my TOPS systems, my VMS system or small cluster of vaxen, for the simple reason that they are behind a firewall based on their great-grand-kid, my variation of one of the BSDs. If you can figure out how to finger my system, it'll provide instructions on how to join the MUD I run. (I don't actually play the game, I provide it & admin it ... it was a provision in the terms that allowed me to take possession of the hardware).
Modern network security isn't "one size fits all", it's a layered thing ... Which is exactly where Microsoft falls down on the job.
- IT bloke publishes comprehensive maps of CALL CENTRE menu HELL
- Nine-year-old Opportunity Mars rover sets NASA distance record
- Analysis Who is the mystery sixth member of LulzSec?
- Prankster 'Superhero' takes on robot traffic warden AND WINS
- Comment Congress: It's not the Glass that's scary - It's the GOOGLE