Re: nice highlighting of sales speak dross in the review
But I could be wrong, maybe they've invented a new isotope.
Going to be difficult to make it notably lighter as a result!
Presumably they've tinkered with the alloy a bit.
4584 posts • joined 16 Apr 2007
But I could be wrong, maybe they've invented a new isotope.
Going to be difficult to make it notably lighter as a result!
Presumably they've tinkered with the alloy a bit.
Just another example of why anyone who chooses to use an Android phone is bonkers
Actually, it's just an example of product liability legislation not being properly applied. Companies like Samsung would certainly up the game if they had a few legal cases to deal with. Of course, you're out of luck with your Note II (long out of warranty) but you should be able to stick CM on it without too many problems: a friend of mine keeps his Galaxy II alive with it. Still, if you've got the cash to splurge on an IPhone 6s, then good for you.
Apple does have a justly good reputation for providing updates for all its handsets at once. But this isn't to say that it doesn't leave them exposed to flaws for long periods of time (the IOS 9 release notes indicated some glaring holes) and anecdotal evidence suggests that IOS updates are also used to encourage hardware updates.
As Peter-Paul Koch pointed out a while back: vendor prefixes are a solution looking for a problem. Working with them without some magic CSS automation which knew when to use which prefixes, added considerably to the overhead for the developer with little obvious benefit: testing them is also a real pain.
The idea behind prefixes was sound enough: allow development in practice rather than in committee but the implementation sucked. A simple switch in the browser "support experimental features" would have sufficed. This would have encouraged gradual enhancement and prevented developers targeting experimental features. Fortunately, Google and Opera decided to stop creating new prefixes for Blink in 2013 and this approach is gradually being adopted by the other browser makers. Except Apple.
TimeMachine has creative ideas about backup robustness.
I find it pretty robust but it has recently developed a habit of chewing cycles and trying to use all the memory. Fortunately stopping and restarting seems to solve this.
I really would like to believe that Tim Cook is serious about quality product.
So would I. Except the sales numbers are probably telling him that he doesn't have to be.
I think the release management is now back on track but, considering the lack of innovation, the number of bugs and the time it takes to fix them (compare Safari with Chromium), it's all a bit depressing.
Apple (and we love to hate them here) are actually pretty good at publishing their bugs a CVE's.
When they finally get round to fixing them. IMO Apple is still encouraging a cult of silence and sitting on too many bugs for too long.
Actually, I blame Drupal.
Most YouTube users are now logged in either in Chrome or via the mobile apps.
Where's the pinch of salt icon?
This is just another of Matt Asay's bits of fluff either for the company he's currently with or for one of his friends: high on opinion, low on fact.
Most YouTube content is shit but for some time now people have been making real money on it. With the move to mobile it also provides much more data about users than when it was just on the web: most users are now logged in and actively engaged. An increasing number of people do use YouTube to consume content like they used to watch TV and this is bringing content and advertisers to the platform. But YouTube also excels at the technology: the technology needed to do all that transcoding, hosting and delivery is simply staggering and one of the reasons why so many media companies rely on YouTube to host trailers in increasingly high resolution. YouTube might well continue to build on those partnerships in, albeit uneasy, exclusive one-offs, particularly of live events.
But a more fundamental critique of the article: just as Facebook doesn't need to make money with video, neither does Alphabet. Page and Brin have made it abundantly clear that they're not interested in quick profits and they control the company. Besides the running costs of the platforms pale in comparison with some of the acquisitions: just think how much Facebook has spunked on WhatsApp, Oculus and Instagram. Alphabet has at least been buying physical product.
You'll miss the internet when it's gone.
What? You mean apart from the porn? ;-)
Just imagine going back to getting things done!
Fuckwits shouldn't be adding their own codes in IETF space.
I guess you don't know until you try.
That wouldn't apply here as this a clear breach of contract.
The kind of case that TTIP wants mediated in smoke-filled rooms are when councils or government decide something is a public resource. Examples of this would be the various "recommunalisations" of utilities going on in Germany, especially those around deals with juicy fixed profits like in Berlin.
An equivalent for the UK would be the contract for the new nuclear plant: under TTIP this piece of crap would be extremely expensive to repeal. Or any of the "heads I win, tails you lose" public-private partnerships. I'm not averse to getting private money directly involved in public projects as opposed to bond financing but the final risk should be equally shared.
It's not about filtering: it's about the waste of resources trying to set up and manage public wifi networks. If you do set them up, worrying about content filtering is probably the least of your worries.
Yes, I know it's cheap but if the cap fits… and it does so obviously here
Everyone using the NHS expects it to be a world leader in digital healthcare
I think that should be something like
Everyone using the NHS expects it to be a world leader in
Patient care and total quality approaches such as those practised at the Queen Elizabeth in Birmingham are so much more important than public wifi. Hospitals need to have their own IT running properly and safely first.
Safe, large-scale wireless networks are a total bugger to setup properly. A friend of mine who does work on hospital IT recently spent a whole week on a training course at Cisco on how to set up hospital wifi that wasn't going to be hacked the second it went live. You simply can't do this with the commodity gear that the cheapo companies tend to use.
And, at the end of the day, competition and technology are continuing to drive down costs so that people should be able to use their own data connections in most parts of the hostiple. This also nicely solves any possible problems of liability Put Faraday cages up in all the sensitive bits: do this in open areas so that you can charge a premium for sub-standard services (like American hotels have been doing) and you can expect similar law suits.
And if anyone is unfortunate enough to come close to the current Wanker of Health then give hime a smack from me. And that silly moo MLF!
I would argue that that such a service should be difficult if not impossible for a single agent to close otherwise, it demonstrates their vulnerability to less official interference.
Who would you argue it to? It's a key part of national sovereignty to be able close services as deemed fit by the courts. WhatsApp is not a utility like water or electricity.
With the internet this is technically extremely difficult without full control of all the cables and radios but it is still well within the remit of the courts to try to do so. China and other countries do it all the time and America is moving that way.
And people should wake up to some of their dependencies. I don't care whether WhatsApp isn't available because of a court injunction or because the company goes bankrupt. I should have a plan B. As Kieren notes, there's a lesson in there about the "network effects" that are trumpeted by the unicorns and their backers.
Your right. I red it as "Mozilla Loses Firefox For Free"
ahem, while we're on the subject of correct spelling… ;-)
Just upgraded and discovered that several plugins including PageSpeed no longer work. Not such a problem for me at the moment but worth checking before upgrading.
Rainbow was camp
Don't know if it was really camp. Charmingly naff in the most part rescued by Zippy's childish nastiness.
The soundtrack was just 1970s naff – the flute is this giveaway – virtually all the music for seventies telly was hideous, like the fashion. Maybe there was a law about it? Whatever, some great TV was made and anyone looking for hidden meanings should get out more.
"This time will be different".
At least from where I'm standing there's a chance: IE 8 has dropped from 4 % in October to just over 1 % on the sites I can see which have a reasonably large corporate audience.
Totally agree. There's no irony there. IE 8 added some extra CSS and JS support but was basically the same browser as IE 6.
If there is irony, it's in thinking that by switching to browser + Active X they were avoiding some kind of legacy lock in. Instead they created substandard UX with just the same kind of lock-in as if they'd stuck with a Windows-native client.
At the time Microsoft, ably aided and abetted by software manufacturers around the world, landed a fantastic marketing coup. And it guaranteed them over 50% market share until about 2010. Unfortunately, the fucking stupid idea of letting the browser run privileged code came back to bite them with a vengeance.
Meanwhile over at the Chocolate Factory…
I was helping set up a tablet for a friend's mum at the weekend and Google was offering a "free" 100 GB for Google Drive. Hard to see people sticking with even Microsoft's paid service with such competition.
We're both here, so it worked. Not much point in complaining about it, when you knew in advance what to expect?
I skip the article and go straight to the comments and get rewarded: the schizophrenic policy of dropping support for IE 10 and IE 9 on Windows but maintaining it for Vista. This is increasingly the case for most of El Reg. The article could have had some value if it at least included data from El Reg's own website statistics, but as we know they never do.
The question recently came up in discussions about a customer site: recommendation is to drop support for IE 9 and blame Microsoft.
Indeed. This is just yet another poorly written piece of clickbait.
Basically anything that El Reg covers regarding browsers is only worth reading for the comments as some of us tend to know a thing or too.
Based on the stats I can see IE 10's market share is already minimal (2% for most of the year). Most systems on which it could be installed on have already been updated to IE 11 or people are using another browser.
IE 9 is a bit more of a problem because of Vista but again, market share is low (around 4% and falling slowly). Internally it's the largely the same engine as 10 and 11 so there shouldn't be too many problems. The odd glitch maybe. Still, MS should really do what it takes get IE 11 to run on Vista,
What all of us in developer land are really happy about is that people really are stopping using IE 8. Market share has now dropped off a cliff from around 4-5% all year to just over 1% now.
Is that it's MySQL only. I could be interested in this is if it was with a real RDBMS.
All of this will make uncomfortable reading for the AI boffins at Google.
It's an easily maintainable server box. Big fucking deal. I'm sure that has the chaps and chapesses at Google quaking in their boots!
Server density, memory speed, network interconnects, total power draw, etc. are probably what keep the engineers in Mountain View awake at night.
I can't update any applications that require logging in, like XCode. Happened before and only took two months to resolve – it never got fixed.
Apple's QA is going to hell.
flash bugs + browser bugs + web bugs > browser bugs + web bugs
Jury's out on that. Fact is all the browsers are more robust than they used to be and the plugin architecture is on the way out. But the same multimedia that provides such a rich vein of attack vectors for Flash may also turn out to be useful for anything accelerated API that is more than likely being given privileged access to hardware (codecs, openGL, etc.). Quicktime and Windows Media Player in the past have had their own share of bugs and they are still providing part of the services for the new browsers.
My guess is that the new attack toolkits just aren't as sophisticated yet as they are for Flash, et al. True the new browsers have been hardened in a way that Macromedia could never have thought of when it was adding the bells and whistles, but who knows if that'll be enough? The browsers have one thing going for them in that they don't publish implementation APIs so that are freer to replace an implementation if it turns out to be a turkey. This comes at on overhead of having to agree the API with other interested parties and then make it work. Flash is a victim of backwards compatibility. Back in the day that meant it could add features quickly and keep developers happy and it effectively ended the "install a plugin to what this video" malarkey we had for much of the first decade of this millennium.
Atlassian's business model is based entirely around the service it provides unlike, say GitHub's, which looks like another massive data grab.
So, as a user of BitBucket for a number of projects I hope that they can continue to provide great service even to us freebooters!
I think you need to ignore the clickbait.
Darwin has always been open source but Apple's release of the source is notoriously haphazard. Yes, people do care about it and Apple gets free peer review: everyone's a winner.
Maybe but it's contributions back then paled in comparison with others such as IBM and HP.
It curates WebKit and CUPS. However, since establishing the ITunes walled garden, the company's enthusiasm for interoperability in all things web has become remarkably tepid. Leaving mainly CUPS as an example of a company that takes open source seriously. Though I suspect we may see some contributions to LibreSSL, assuming this has been adopted as the replacement for OpenSSL in El Capitan.
The GPL may not be closed but it certainly is restrictive. BSD licence is attribution and caveat emptor only.
Does anyone else do version numbering like this?
Yes, it's also known as semantic versioning. You also see it with lots of open source stuff including Firefox and Chrome
With y as the variable:
x.x.y updates should be drop in for existing systems
x.y.x may include new features but shouldn't break compatibility
y.x.x can be expected to include API changes
In reality you'll often find overlap between the latter two as "minor" changes develop feature creep. Switching to time-based releases is the best antidote there.
You also occasionally see suffixes to the patch version: _1 on MacPorts for the change to a port where nothing upstream has changed. You will also see x.x.x.a stuff à la openssl but that is generally frowned about as semantically vague.
Has El Reg cut a deal with (f)ailing social media company Twitter?
Bolding the tweets and giving and aligning them in the centre does not do much for readability. Not that that really matters that much given their content. It reminds of junior school reporting in front the teacher: "but he said, but she said…"
Trump is spouting some fairly stupid stuff to keep himself in the news. That there may be method in the madness is worth considering. See Scott Adams light-hearted articles.
Whois system that helps criminals to hide their identities when they register domain names.
Hang on. I thought helping criminals (and others) hide their identities was the entire point of the State of Delaware?
What? You mean like the doughnuts the boss has just ordered for a board meeting?
I like the idea of luring the security team in with pizza as bait.
So, $200M/100000 equates to at least 2000 programmers or equivalent jobs in the development team
Not really. Employee costs are, dependent upon country, twice their nominal salary due to contributions to healthcare, pensions, social security, etc. Buildings and capital expenditure will also be not negligible.
I'm not suggesting that Mozilla doesn't have a bloated development budget: things like Firefox OS will certainly have sucked up all kinds of resources. But accounting for these things is not as we sometimes think.
Oh, like Opera is trying with the pointless "Discover" feature. Like Taboola but built into the browser? Why not just go the whole hog? But then just concentrate on salacious, celebrity clickbait.
Always was wondering why they did not ditch ARM altogether and went Intel all the way
Because Intel couldn't provide chips for the power envelope at the time. Now that they sort of can the Intel chips still cost more than ARM. Difficult to get / keep the OEM market going under those conditions – as Intel has repeatedly demonstrated – and that this the stated aim. The assemblies in Shenzhen et al. are built entirely around ARM SoCs.
Guess what? Nobody wants to run the risk of their strategic selection being suddenly obsolete overnight, courtesy of rabid, stick-up-bum arsehattery
Yes, because Microsoft never pull patches after release either.
Sys admins should be able to live with any library that has reliable release management. With security stuff you can't necessarily expect just one patch per month. Urgent exploits need urgent patches.
Forking a project might be a means of last resort but sometimes it's the best thing to do. For example, the BSD projects have prospered after their forks. The reasons given for forking LibreSSL rather than trying to fix openssl were sound at the time and that project has more or lived up to its more limited expectations. Various bits of the internet has seen libraries swapped in and out over time and it will be no different here.
I was checking with someone on Friday about this who maintains a downstream (Python) package based on openssl. Not only was this a push-me-pull-you but the different releases also had different breakages.
It would be less bad if openssl didn't have such a fucked up versioning system. It would be marginally less shit if they actually stuck with the one they have. But they didn't. Re-releasing effectively negates the crypto-hashes of the software. Not so clever for crypto-software.
The thing is that the project is now well-financed thanks to some PR-tastic donations by the mega corps. But it doesn't seem to be reflected in release management.
I've just checked an libressl is now in Macports. Time for port uninstall -f openssl and port install libressl methinks.
Have they also been debarred?
Manchester: The Turd They Keep Trying To Polish.
To be born in Manchester is to win the first prize in life. FTFY
Don't forget that Maggie had to have second law explicitly further deregulating Manchester's buses so that her cronies at Stagecoach and Arriva could get on with their low wage, low service offerings.
I don't live there any more but when I go home it seems to me that the GMPTE (as was) has been growing a pair over the last few years. Especially the way the tram tendering has been handled.
I now live in Germany so find all the British ticketing systems stupid because they pretend that pricing has any relation to the length of an individual journey. Zonal pricing is the only way to do things.
in which case the sql injection prevention which is still part of the input filtering will kick in. It's not ideal, but it does add an extra layer of protections just in case it's necessary
I've yet to see any kind of input filtering with respect to the database that wasn't basically a farce. It's a sticking plaster on a sieve. It adds to the maintenance but not to the value.
Sack any developer who writes code that doesn't pass the data in as parameters.
This worries me. What do you mean buy it? I've only ever seen it used in systems that only looked like they were more secure.
If you aren't passing parameters into a prepared statement then you are doing it wrong. It is the DB's job to handle the parameters.
I totally agree with you: PHP is evil.
However, chacun a son goût and all that.