"Keep in mind that this was a really difficult post to right."
Or even spell!
538 posts • joined 17 Sep 2009
"Keep in mind that this was a really difficult post to right."
Or even spell!
"...where do you get the necessary drivers for any other operating system from?"
I can't speak about your first point regarding whether or not MS can guarantee its software, but you can get OSs with drivers built in. Linux for one. I can say that as I use it exclusively but AFAIK the BSDs also have drivers built-in.
So, with Linux and the BSDs you have pretty much covered all areas of computing from HPC right through to embedded systems, desktops, servers and stuff like the Raspberry Pi.
Having to scratch around for drivers for your OS can be avoided if you are open to alternatives to Windows..
Users of the world's second best browser...
Not sure that second most used necessarily equals second best.
It all depends on the meaning of best.
The list goes on.
I have my own preferred browser and it's neither Chrome nor IE.
One, because I trust Google about as far as I could spit 'em.
Two, I use Linux so couldn't use IE even if I wanted to.
I'll stick with Palemoon until something better suited to my needs appears.
" At its height, the project employed some 200 staff - but many have since moved on."
I'm not surprised, we always used to call that sort of thing "Shit and run"
Or it could be that the rats have noticed that the ship is about to sink.
And to think we are paying for this fiasco.
You couldn't make this up.
"...to light the minds of those who build and market the machines for our consumption."
I couldn't agree more. That's why I am in danger of being perceived as an outdated stick-in-the-mud by never buying a laptop.
In my desktop support days I dreaded getting a call from one of the lap-top owners on the site. The damned things were a nightmare to fix, any hardware problems were almost unfixable and actually getting into the guts of the thing wasted a lot of the user's budget and my time because they were so fiddly.
Luckily, personally I have the knowledge and skills to be able to build my own desktops, that way I know what is in there and as a Linux user also what goes onto the HDD. I'm not saying that that is for everyone of course, but you do seem to pay a very heavy price for portability. The Motorola idea of a modular mobile is interesting, notwithstanding Jonathan Ive's ranting, I wonder if a modular laptop would be practical.
"And I believe that’s abdicating your responsibility as a designer.”
Or it could be as others above have said that it is giving the customer the choice.
No, knowing Apple, what's really rattling their cage is the potential loss of control.
What ever happened to the old saying "The customer is always right."
"...£91m of pounds in savings," Pounds of what I wonder.
"The designers rave about its radical focus on 'the user’ rather than the needs of Whitehall,”
Well that knackers the use of any site designed like that, "Sod the content, look at the shiny!"
As someone who was trained, many years ago, as a systems analyst, the question comes to mind, why did they not find out what the systems were for and who used them. Its simple enough, just ask the users and admins what it is that the system actually does and how it does it.
You know, systems analysis.
To me it looks like the GDS have recruited people with the same mind-set as those who developed, if that is the term, MS's Metro and Canonical's Unity. They seem to be arrogant know-it-alls who are so in love with their "vision" that practicality and the the needs of the clients is ignored in pursuit of showing off their so-called design skills. Remember form follows function. A pickaxe with a nice bendy handle might look different but probably won't do the job it was supposed to do.
It's a pity that I only have one downvote to give you.
Oh, and bravo for such courage posting as an AC.
Unlike you I have a spine and have just signed up to the campaign.
P.S. On a brighter note you might just be in the running for a Vulture Dropping award. Well done.
"Yeah, they find it easier to que @ Apple Shop."
It might be that you could get your point across better if you were to spell words properly.
The word you seem to be hinting at with "que" is actually spelt "queue".
See also the misspelling of grammar in another post:
That sir, is trolling
Well done that hacker.
What all this effort goes to show is that you never really "own" an iThing, you just pay for the privilege of borrowing it.
That suits a lot of Apple's customers and they are happy to go along with all the nannying but infuriates those with the skills and interest to want to take control of something that they have paid a lot of money for.
I know that people in the US have a reputation for being litigious but can't see why anyone would throw money into a law suit that has very little chance of success.
To misquote a former British prime Minister what Apple is really about is: "Control, control, control." Oh, apart from grabbing as much money as they can from their fans.
"Don't vote, it only encourages the bastards."
Surely that is the WORST tactic?
Exactly, that's why I said that abstention was a bad idea.
After all, hypothetically if the only person voting was the candidate plus friends then one of the "bastards" would get elected. Time for a "None of the above" choice on the ballot paper in my opinion.
""As Home Secretary from 1965–1967..."
Thank you, you have made my point.
Roy Jenkins was Home Secretary a long time ago. Longer than before many on this site were born.
"... just need to stop voting in the old same guys..."
I agree, but where are the alternatives?
It seems to me that as soon as one lot get elected their civil servants come in with a tray of papers and promptly co-opt the aforementioned electees into the "Establishment" They all seem to go native.
For example, when was the last time that you saw a libertarian Home Secretary? No, they all adopt an authoritarian approach handing out diktats backed by draconian threats and penalties. Who would have thought that the likes of Jack Straw or John Reid were members of the Labour party? You know, the one supposed to be on the side of the workers. A Tory Home Secretary bludgeoning the lower class is to be expected but the same from the "Party of the People"?
One could follow the advice of Russell Brand "Don't vote, it only encourages the bastards." But that does not solve the problem. Perhaps if we could clean out the upper ranks of the Civil Service and disband the "Establishment" we might have a chance, but I'll not be holding my breath as they have all the levers of power in their hands and we are but dust beneath the wheels of their chariots.
"the many-megapixel cameras..."
Now I may be wrong here but is the fact that a camera has a lot of pixels less important than the size of the detector?
Given the size of a smart phone against that of a DSLR which one will have the larger detector?
My vote is for the DSLR, so why do DSLR owners "... occasionally sigh in frustration when they see its output." Perhaps because they don't know how to get the best out of their DSLR?
I may be biased as an owner of a DSLR but not a smart phone but I can see no reason why a camera in a smart phone should be able to out-perform a dedicated DSLR camera, if the owners have a comparable skill in using them.
This proposal from an organisation (the government) with a proven track record of throwing money into a bottomless IT money pit.
Not so much "Caveat emptor more caveat vendor."
All this will do is freeze out the little guy and allow the mega-corps a free run as they will be able to take the risk of supplying a very risky customer.
"The ghost of the former chair lives on. "
Then he should be sat on very firmly!
I can't work out how to do it on a PC...
No, neither can I. All I have been able to do is make Flash ask permission before it runs. I stick to using it only on the BBC and other sites I trust, but it still has me worried.
I've now written to the BBC asking them to ditch Flash for all the good that will do but will not be holding my breath.
Be afraid... etc.
"Use Chrome... It's just been updated...
No? Use IE or FF and get pOwned."
Yeah right, cut out the middle man and just let Google scoop up all your data. If that's not being "pOwned" then what is?
The fact that you can use this gizmo to find your car is a good one. Hunt the Mini no more!
The rest? No thanks, I'll stck to my funny shaped pieces of metal.
" ...there's even a mission statement in the NSA HQ foyer reminding analysts how important privacy is."
I'm sure there is, the question is, is it their privacy or ours?
"Fortunately your URL https://ssl.bbc.co.uk/faqs/forms/ worked for me..."
Yes, so it does.
I wonder if the indirect boot up the BBC's backside that I gave it worked.
I too have left a request that they get rid of Flash.
"And one important aspect of security is to keep installations minimal. "
Amen to that. The Unix maxim "Do one thing and do it well"
Yes systemd, I'm looking at you.
"Even CNN plays you videos without Flash."
The BBC doesn't and when I tried to contact them about their reliance on Flash via their web form:
I got this error message:
"An error occurred during a connection to ssl.bbc.co.uk. The OCSP response contains out-of-date information. (Error code: sec_error_ocsp_old_response) "
It makes you wonder what they are doing with all the money that they forcibly extract from the viewers.
Oh, I still haven't worked out how you get in contact to ask them to ditch this piece of shit.
"The flaw meant crims could drive off with a luxury freebie... "
Rolls Royce? Yes the luxury car's luxury car.
BMW? Maybe, but they are like belly buttons, nearly everybody has one. Full of gadgets but a bit below luxury level in most cases
But the new Mini? Surely no-one in their right mind would call one of those great dumplings a luxury car. If BMW were to go in that direction and fill the thing with fancy gadgets and fittings then they have finally lost any lingering reasons why the original was such a wonderful development.
Minimal car, maximal utility.
To do that meant that most aspects of the car were reduced to basics. Sliding windows, one speed heater and that was against Issigonis' original intentions, pull cords to open the doors, etc.
The only thing these cars have in common is BMW.
As you might have guessed I do not like the new "Mini", however if someone was to offer me a Rolls Royce I would quickly prove that I have no bias against BMW.
It works fine for me.
I do not use Google, I use Duckduckgo instead, Vimeo instead of Youtube and Palemoon instead of Chrome. I block Googleanalytics and other Google spyware with Noscript and PrivacyBadger etc.
I could go on but that would be tedious.
It can be done though it takes a bit of thinking about and I wouldn't expect my granny or sister to have all the knowledge required but as an ex IT pro I can and do keep Google as far away from my data as possible.
easy-to-ridicule ZX81 …
Maybe it is easy to ridicule the ZX81 with 20/20 hindsight but at the time it was an amazing bit of kit for the hobbyist.
You might as well ridicule the Guidance and Navigation System on the Apollo Lunar Module:
But it did get the job done with all of the constraints of the state of the art at that time.
Same with the ZX81
"... have committed to providing patients with an option that recognises their objection but does not impact on their direct care."
"We don't expect any other break in service."
That's a pity.
... that these so called security experts will keep in touch with their alma mater.
Would you really trust anyone who has been trained by GCHQ to have the best interest of the general public at heart or would there be the suspicion that this poacher turned gamekeeper is not really on your side?
You might be able to take the person out of GCHQ but could you take GCHQ out of the person?
Personally I wouldn't touch an ex-GCHQ startup with a bargepole.
"Julie Brill, privacy commissioner for the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) defended the US approach to protecting privacy."
That shouldn't have taken her long then. It seems that the US policy towards privacy is to have no policy. Oh, unless one of the mega-corporations say that they could make money and then there is a policy. To wit, give the mega-corps everything it asks for.
Good to see a little counter-fire from Paul Nemitz but I'll suspend judgement until I see more than just words.
The only connection I want with my car is that between the tyres and the road.
But then I am an old dinosaur who does not want my car to talk to me, tell me where to go or try to entertain me.
It's a car for heavens sake, you know the thing that gets you from A to B.
" ... stating that Google employs a 30-strong Chrome security team... "
This misses the point. Oh they may try and keep the baddies out of your internet session but in the meantime are busily conducting a man in the middle attack of their own.
As Credas says, if you want to block stuff, look to the likes of Adblock plus and so on. It's hard to block Google from snooping on your Chrome sessions.
I haven't heard much about Iron, is it still going?
" ... when the two leaders will discuss internet security."
Yeah, Get the hell out of our faces for a start.
Seriously, if these two can put a curb on the so called "security" apparatus and start forcing them to abide by the lax, specially written laws that they are supposed to work under we might all be better off.
If they start using the powers that they already have and use their brains rather than relying on a drag-net to spot the baddies, then perhaps we will all be safer. As it is they take the lazy option and just run fishing expeditions on everything they can lay their hands on.
A little application would not come amiss and then we might find that we have less to worry about being attacked.
From the baddies as well as our own governments.
"... MI5 and GCHQ, acting with proper legal warrant... "
Ah, there's the rub.
" ... MI5 has no desire to seek sweeping powers for their own sake or loosen our long-held commitment to necessity and proportionality."
But it appears from the Snowden revelations that they do neither. Rather they take what they want when they want, " Because we can." and rationalise this activity afterwards. WE are asked to trust them to do what is legal without us having any chance to see if it is or not. That's all taken care of by Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee. Trust in politicians is a rare commodity and the close tie between Parliament and the security apparatus means that the rules governing the conduct of such organisations are usually slanted as to allow them to do pretty much as they please. If criticism is then made out comes the standard reply. "We operate within the law." Of course they do, they helped write it.
It all comes down to trust and by their actions they have forfeited this. Commercial companies such as Apple and Microsoft see this as a threat to their business and take measures to counter such threats. Hence the new empahsis on security for the users.
It will be interesting to see which side wins, the bottom line or the security organisations.
"If on the other hand you do something nasty through sneakiness and duplicity... Well it's a tough old universe out there. Well done you!"
I agree, I probably should have expanded my argument to point out that in EVE at least, you are supposed to be competing against the other players and not the game. A sandbox is how EVE is usually described and to me that's pretty near the mark.
What the players in E:D seem to have done is game the system and been rewarded for it. No wonder there is a bit of a stink.
"It's not meant to be fair - its a dog eat dog universe."
If that's what you are looking for then play EVE Online. E:D was touted as being different from EVE.
Oh and by the way CCP, the developers of EVE, come down like a ton of bricks on anything regarded as an exploit, which the snafu on E:D most decidedly was. It doesn't matter whose fault it is, anyone taking advantage gets hammered.
"Similarly, every time I changed gear in my ancient Mini, my hand would rub against my g/f's thigh. That *was* rewarding."
Yeah, and they say that driving a Mini (an original one, of course) is the best fun you can have in car on your own.
"Microsoft issued a statement to the effect that it is aware of the problem and is preparing a fix."
Pity that they were probably the last to know about it.
“a paradigm shift for a goliath of a company and its perception in[the] industry,”
Rather it should be :
“a paradigm shift for a goliath of a company and its perception of [the] industry,”
The FLOSS world already has a perception of MS and selective releases of software is not going to change this in a hurry.
What MS has done is realise that the world is changing and that it is in danger of being left behind and somehow it has to clamber aboard the FLOSS bandwagon before it sinks into irrelevance. So MS is not doing this because it has had an epiphany but because the thing that really matters to it, the bottom line, is under threat and it's clutching at any straw it can find.
Agreed. This is a pure power grab
Look at this:
"...attracting ideas, individuals, organizations, and funding..."
Or in other words. "We have no idea what any of this is going to do nor are we willing to pay for it, All we do know is that we want to be in charge, whatever comes out of all this."
They are making this up as they go along and as for being bottom-up, well words fail me.
Still, one thing comforts me. The internet was designed to route around damage and with luck those actually running the web will do likewise and ignore this farce.
For those of us allergic to sudo there is always PCLinuxOS.: PCLOS
They have just released their latest edition and have stated that they see no reason to incorporate systemd in their distro.
Good luck to the Devuan devs. but there is a fall-back if it all goes pear-shaped.
A conundrum indeed.
“But as it now stands, the Second Amended Settlement confers a substantial benefit on the individual defendants and derivative plaintiffs’ counsel...”
So because the judge has spotted that the settlement gives the defendants a get out of jail card applicable to all previous misdemeanors and lines the pockets of the lawyers defending them with no benefit to the plaintiffs, they are all going to have to go back to square one and try to thrash out something a little less lop-sided. For which the aforementioned lawyers plus their counterparts can continue with their snouts in the trough.
It does make you wonder which side the plaintiffs' lawyers are on if they agreed to such a settlement.
"Truly Bilbo must be the most light-fingered Hobbit in the whole of Middle Earth."
To be fair Bilbo was taken along by the dwarves as the "Expert Treasure Hunter" or burglar on Gandalf's recommendation so I reckon he was really living up to his billing.
"I can't remember the name of the film off hand (it's the one about Parkes radio telescope during the Apollo 11 landing),"
It's called "The Dish"
I loved it when the band played what they thought was the US national anthem and it turned out to be the theme to Hawaii 5-O.
So where's the single market in this fiasco?
Surely the EU Commission will have something to say about it.
"The ideal would be complete separation of OS and user so the OS could be separately maintained. "
See; /BIN, /USR, /HOME . It's in an OS called Linux.
" I'd pay for such an OS!"
No need, see above.
"And do the organizers intend to spend their $600,000 flying 25 VIPs around the world...?"
"And do the organizers intend to spend their $600,000 flying 25 SIPs (Self-Important People) around the world...?"
There fixed it for you.
There does seem to be a lot of talk about "multi-stakeholders" in these discussions. And their description of these "multi-stakeholders"? To quote:
"Yes, governments walked away from 1net because they said they couldn't participate…"
So, governments are in, then look at those organising this. The WEF (that well known inclusive organisation) and ICANN so we have got big business and vested interests onboard. Where are those people and organisations who actually made the internet? Not only conspicuous by their absence but actively rejecting this proposal. And what about the people who actually pay for all of this, you know, the users i.e. you and me. I don't see anyone in this group being offered a seat. No, this is a self-aggrandising bunch who want to impose their views on something that others have developed and judging by their actions thus far, they won't tolerate dissent or criticism.
Does this have the smell of Xamarin about it?
I've had my doubts about Canonical for a while now and to see them snuggling up to MS just adds to my disquiet. Seems to me that both De Icaza and Shuttleworth are being seduced by the lure of MS's money. AS PNGuinn says best take a long spoon with you if you are going to get invited to MS's table or you might just feature on the menu instead!
There may be tears ahead.