1790 posts • joined 19 Dec 2010
No, Windows can do this on its own.
As of Windows Vista PowerShell is now installed by default. All the OP needed to do was to start the right commandline environment for this job.
PS > Select-String -Path c:\this\strange\directory\*.sam -Pattern "fred"
And you're done.
Well, its not as if we can already easily manage to leave our own solar system. Last probe that succeeded was launched in 1977 and only around 2007 did it finally leave the solar system (although it did visit some outer planets first).
Leaving out security?
Am I the only one who doesn't consider this to be the brightest of ideas?
Just to make sure that this really was what I thought it to be I looked up the ADF Security and ended up on this page (Oracle article). A small quote: "The goal of ADF Security is to ease and promote secure application development based on standard J2EE security features and the Java Authentication and Authorization Service (JAAS).".
Now, I realize that there's always the standard EE layer and the, as mentioned above, JAAS. Even so I think that when you're dealing with web applications the one thing not to ignore is the security part.
It would have made a lot more sense to me if Oracle left out some of the parts which made setting up the "eye candy" easier than actually and effectively risking to reduce security.
Have they already forgotten the issues with Java 7 ?
They should have added a commercial release
I think there are plenty of people who don't understand the reason why people get upset. Sure; you can easily uninstall the lens parts and be done with it. Of course; Ubuntu was targeted at making Linux as easy as possible, so even end users could enjoy it, another problem.. But even that is not the main thing pissing people off I think.
Have we already forgotten what Ubuntu stands for? Its not just a name; its a philosophy. Which in short seems to mean "humanity" or "friendlyness towards others" (from the top of my head).
Put short: its named for following a friendly philosophy which in my opinion boil down to "Treat others as you want them treat you". Needless to say but enforcing spyware on your users sort of goes entirely against this ancient wisdom. Is it really that hard that this is going to piss people off?
Worse yet: because you're touching the very basis of the distribution you're bound to tick people off, even if they may consider this to be a rather moot issue. Its not so much the spyware as a whole; its going against what Ubuntu stands for. And that can and will scare off a lot of Ubuntu die hards and followers; people who fully believe in this.
Canonical should have known better, because I think the damage done might be much greater than one might realize. I mean; if they know this little about the distribution, what guarantees have followers that they won't do even worse?
In my opinion Canonical should have added a commercial release. I dunno; maybe a server edition which can be supported for 5 years or so. Or extra commercial support for the product. Which is putting the finger on another sore spot: is it possible that Canonical wanted a way to generate more revenue but without too much extra effort? How friendly is that; normally people work for their money...
I am not an Ubuntu user anymore, I used to be a big fan of the LTS releases. But the ideas behind Ubuntu have always appealed to me. As such, even as an outsider I think this has fail written all over it.
Actually going from a Long Term Support (LTS) release to a regular one isn't that much of a big deal. Because what do you think people suggest you do if an LTS to LTS upgrade goes wrong (which unfortunately still seems to be the case quite often) ?
Then you're advised to upgrade to all versions in between individually; version for version.
Its merely a dist-upgrade setting.
First they practice on the main distribution, then they'll check how to embed this in all supported variants...
Somewhat meant jokingly but even so; do you really think they'll stop here is there's money to be made?
All that's left to do...
Is to hope its a real rock and not an alien egg ;-)
I'll believe it when I see it...
Now, this is probably comparing apples and oranges but MS has their VirtualPC for quite some time now. Its even featured with Win7 professional as "Windowx XP mode", this allows Win7 pro users to run a virtual Windows XP instance.
Of course this is where the good part of the story ends. While it can grok server 2008 and such it won't run Windows 8 for example (which I consider a pretty fail). Nor most linux distributions (I have managed to get Debian to work, but it wasn't easy and that's about it wrt Linux).
So with this in mind... Topping VMWare? I'll believe that the moment I'm able to run a virtual Windows 8 on my current Windows 7 using a Microsoft based solution.
But until then....
Let me guess...
First the brasses used this app themselves and then all of a sudden either weren't pleased with the results or finally realized that this could put them into a rough spot.
And so the app had to go...
Why? (who cares!)
"The deal caused some head-scratching from observers – why would a recruiting site want to acquire media and code-hosting businesses?"
Advertising, advertising, advertising.
Your (our) problem is that we're tempted to look at this with a reality vision in the back of our heads; some of my fellow posters also mentioned as much above: geeks (think Slashdot) use ad blockers.
But that is now how the suits look at this.. In Holland we have a nice saying: "Ongehinderd door enige kennis van zaken".. or: "Not disturbed with any knowledge on the subject..." is a good translation.
But to be honest.. The fact that El Reg carried this news /sooner/ than Slashdot itself is what I consider to be the real dealbreaker here.
Could it be they don't want the /. crowd to know? I'm not just saying this: a lot of times /. "beats" others such as El Reg to some of the technical based news. As such... puzzling...
Didn't Sony already do this?
Some year ago I bought my gf 'EyePet'; its a PS3 game involved around the Playstation Eye (camera) which displays your room on the telli and adds a plushy adorable furry creature into the mix. She actually liked it and thus the down side; it meant cleaning out the table and freeing it from everything which could block the view of the camera because the game wouldn't work otherwise.
Even so; I have to admit being impressed with what I saw. Even trying to kick the virtual creature away from my couch only made it jump up and carefully avoid my feet.
As such... not sure if I understood the article right but it seems to me as if Sony beat them to the punch a few years.
Oh I agree
Only problem is "Importance for who". In my experience I'd say its important to realize you'd best steer clear of this one if you're using a desktop environment.
That can be important too you know, though most likely not what Ballmer intended.
Microsoft seeks money
Make no mistake about it: this comment comes from someone using and actually /liking/ Office 2010. Thing is; I'm glad I stepped onto this the way I did because what came out next.. ugh...
Office 365 is about the worst investment you can get into in my opinion. Because while it may not appear to be a major investment multiply the price you pay per month by 12 or 24 and then compare that to the purchase price of plain Office.
Another issue to keep in mind: Although I think 365 is decent it cannot compete with the desktop apps. If you are an "office power user" (meaning: you use templates and VBA code to back those up) then 365 won't help you out. Heck; worse... There are several features which the desktop has and 365 simply can't cope with.
Bottom line: if this deal appeals to you (why not?) I'd urge you to first: DEMO 365 before you sign up. Maybe you'll like what you see; good. Then you got confirmation. But I think chances are high that you don't like what you see; then you saved quite some money.
With the small difference that XP is still officially supported by Microsoft and Win98 has long been EOL'd.
Work for beer is dangerous!
Hasn't she ever seen Blues Brothers?
"Ok, $200 and you boys drank for $300 worth of beer".
"The court might decide they are responsible TO keep data - if I post something illegal on Twitter and then remove it, they should not allow me to delete it and get away scot free."
That holds more truth than you know it. In the EU companies are bound by law to keep e-mails and logfiles and preserve them for at least 5 years. I don't think many companies actually comply with this law because storing all of that data would become quite a hassle. Even so; this is the law over here.
The new Office doesn't ship?
Like who cares?
Ok; that was a sneer (troll?). Sorry, but I can't come to conclude that MS is doing its utmost best to make their new products as inaccessible as they can.
Take the new Office.. If I want to start a new Word document I fire up Word. Sounds logical enough; but the new Word doesn't put me in a new (empty) Word document. Nooooo.... It gets me into the "open new & recent" section from which I can select a previous document or select a template on which to base my document on. Of course without any option to skip this crap and move into the empty section I want. Nope; I need to press escape first.
Talk about fail.. I mean honestly; why not give us users a choice. You know; allowing a wide range of end users to use your products the way WE want ?
I can understand how Microsoft finally discovered the start screen, many other vendors (NetBeans being my example) have done so too though YEARS before them. However; those vendors also (very) quickly discovered that adding an option to disable or bypass that start screen was a very smart decision too.
And here we are now: Microsoft reinventing he wheel without paying attention to any prior cause. As usual. While ending up making things much harder on the end user. As usual again it seems.
Good for who?
First of all one has to wonder who will actually profit from this move. The company user for using a new product, or the company for using a product which could make them usable for promotional activities?
Quite frankly I think the only businesses which would consider Win8 on the desktop are those who haven't bothered to look into the whole administrative part yet. Because even from an admin pov the start screen has fail written all over it.
Where the start menu was a fully modular environment the start screen is turned into a single file entity which contains the used tiles, the start screen settings, etc. The fail part should be obvious: if a user gets a new application or one is removed this will also reset his/her entire start screen to the default settings. Because the only way to achieve this is by publishing an entire new start screen.
In the old situation one could easily push a single link to a global group which would result in that link becoming visible to all users.
Guess this behaviour should also be limited to the desktop (which kept the modular behaviour).
But I see another fail wrt windows 8, especially for business use.
Liked the video
That it wasn't a perfect video only adds up to it IMO. I only see a guy (possibly) suddenly thinking "hey, that could be cool for an El Reg article" and without any planning shot a video with the help of a colleague or friend or helpful bystander.
Just like they're not enforcing desktop users to use a touch-optimized environment eh?
Seems they made a mistake....
If you check the download links for 'Express 2012 for Windows 8' and 'Express 2012 for desktop' you'll notice that both point to the same link (linkid 9816758 for the web installer and 9816768 for the ISO). It seems to me as if someone replaced one version with the other.
I noticed after I first installed the desktop version and then wanted to install the Windows 8 version. Instead of a new installer I was greeted with the option to either repair or remove the desktop version.
No, the icons in the taskbar do not have jumplists. Jumplists were a feature explicitly tied to the start menu.
"Yes, you can. (Aside from actual Metro apps, which never run elevated, by design)"
Sorry, but you're wrong. You right click in the corner where you normally click to go to the TIFKAM start screen. So you're calling up a context menu from which you can select things such as "computer management", "disk management", etc.. You can't right click again here in order to raise your privileges.
In the other example the same deal applies: you're in the charms section. You can't right click there to call up more options.
What most people seem to ignore is that Microsoft used to be very straight forward with this. You'd be surprised how long "progman.exe" was kept included with Windows even though they had long implemented the start menu. Eventually it obviously got removed.
And this has always been the case; Microsoft implemented some drastic changes before, but /ALWAYS/ made sure that customers could move back while eventually removing those options, but only on newer versions.
Windows XP could be made to look and feel like Windows 9x with a single column start menu. On Windows Vista and Windows 7 this specific option got removed, but you can still change the appearance of the start menu and Windows as a whole.
THAT is IMO the reason why many people complain and why I think Win8 is going to turn into a failure. Microsoft should not have broken their own cycle; the start menu should have been included in Windows 8 and maybe get removed in Windows 9.
And the worst part; if that "more stuff" comes through the Marketplace then Microsoft gets to cash in on both sides; from annoyed customers who resort to 3rd party solutions and from the developers who try to sell their 3rd party solutions.
Talk about a twisted business model...
What a bunch of nonsense...
The author has a point here and there but every time ignores the major issue: decrease of usability and functionality.
"Pin the applications you use most often to the taskbar, and you rarely need the Start menu."
The problem with this is that a set of pinned applications is purely static. I actually use the 'most started' section because it reflects the stuff I most often use. When I'm doing software design you'll find stuff such as NetBeans, VP-UML, Word and so in there. When I'm doing administration or presentations you'll see stuff such as PowerPoint, Word, Excel and such appear.
And without Aero on the desktop I wonder if those pinned icons will actually give me jumplists like I have now.
"Windows 8 also adds the Administration menu, mouse bottom left and right-click, or press Windows key and X. It is the quickest route to things like Disk Management, Event Viewer and Device Manager, and you miss it when returning to Windows 7."
Miss it on Win7? Nonsense: just add "Administration tools" to your start menu. Then click start, hover over 'Administration tools' and you're done.
Another nasty side effect to this Win8 crapola: because you're in TIFKAM you can't simply right click and use the option "run as administrator", which you can in Win7. Why would you want that? Well, believe it or not; but there are people who actually don't use an admin account while on Windows 7.
"Finally, search in the new Start screen is better than before. Just start typing."
And even more nonsense. On Win7 I hit the windows button, start typing and get my results nicely sorted in sections, where programs are obviously on top because those get started most often. But I also see control panel options, documents, etc. All nicely sorted. On Win8 you can only search in certain sections, one at a time. In other words you always need to remember to press the right shortcut to search OR after typing the search string "simply" use the mouse to click on the section you want.
Its not easier; it adds more burden to get to the same results.
Is this about language or about control?
I think the whole thing runs much deeper than most people care to realize.
First of all; the whole suggestion of a "post .NET world" is preposterous. Because what exactly is WinRT? Basically its a set of Windows 8 APIs, just like the current API ("Windows API" also called "Win32 API") is available on Windows 7 and Vista. Also from .NET, so what's the issue here?
But the reason I call this preposterous is not so much because of the obvious above. Has the author already forgotten about Windows Server 2012? By default this installs in a 'core mode' thus leaving only a command line based console. Administration is done through the Remote Server Administration Tools ("RSAT") and/or... Windows PowerShell. This is Microsoft's "new" de-facto administration tool. And guess what; it sits completely on the .NET framework. PowerShell is what eventually got me to grab a version of the Express versions of Visual Studio for VB.NET and C#.NET.
I think language access is the least bit to be concerned about. When it comes to the influence of the new TIFKAM environment I have much bigger concerns: An immense decrease in control. On Windows 7 I can basically install and use whatever I want. On a TIFKAM based environment I can only use whatever Microsoft provides me with in their marketplace. Thus effectively generating an environment for them to rule out any players which they don't like.
Office 8 is fully TIFKAM integrated. Do you really think that should the OpenOffice people ever step onto the TIFKAM bandwagon and produce a TIFKAM enabled version of their Office environment, that it would find its way onto the Microsoft marketplace? I sincerely doubt that.
THAT is in my opinion the real danger of the whole Windows 8 doctrine. Its not a change of development, its not so much an issue of being forced onto a touch-based user interface which should also be pushed down the throats of the desktop users. No, in my opinion this runs much deeper and seems to be more sinister ("seems to be" because at this point I can obviously not state that MS would actually ban programs such as OpenOffice, but they do create the environment which would allow them to).
Don't worry about languages, worry about being forced into a Microsoft dominated and controlled environment instead. Please note that I'm not suggesting that such an environment would be "bad" or "evil" perse, not my words. But I do state that such an environment could easily be (ab)used to do exactly that.
I happen to own a Winphone (7.5) and I think its very /very/ unlikely.
As long as Microsoft doesn't change their design and usability (combined with user friendlyness) its not going to happen any time soon and will only attract a diverse crowd by itself. Not the masses they hope for.
Example? Well, take the 'Office hub', a key feature. I open a new Word document, type in a word "test", double tap it to select it and now I want to set this to bold and italic. How to proceed?
You click the 'format' button at the bottom, then a selection comes up, allowing me to select between bold, italic, underline but also several different colours. I click 'bold' and I'm right back where I started. So now I can go again; click format, click italic and I'm done.
And this was the easy part.
When I'm taking quick notes (using OneNote) and I want something to appear in bold (not too unreasonable I'd say) then I can't just click on an icon to change the texts formatting. Because the only (directly accessible) options I have there are "format as list, add a todo check marker, insert picture, insert audio".
I have to wonder here... How often would you format text in comparison to adding pictures or audio data?
Alas; for options such as 'format' I now need to open the menu and select the option from there, and of course the same issue as mentioned above applies.
Its usable, its doable but I can't help wonder if its really as userfriendly as people claim.
Unfortunately that could also be caused by GD itself, its one of their not so great services in my opinion. I've had such issues for quite a while; a VPS doing absolutely nothing would stay responsive for approx. 30 - 60 minutes and then turn completely unreachable.
When I reset said VPS the above scenario occurred, and when I contacted support they reset the VPS for me, concluded that it was back up and thus told me 'case closed'.
The fun part was when I setup a "phone home" routine (cron job which pinged one of my other (non-GD) servers and down/up -loaded a file); even during periods where the server was completely unreachable it would still easily perform such communication feats, thus ruling out external issues such as DoS or something.
When I discovered that I dropped the idea entirely to use GD for anything else but domain registrations and SSL certs.
But if she was naked how would we know it was a GD girl? ;-)
What can I say... "It just works".
I've been using them for approx. 4 to 8 years or so and this it the first time I've experiences issues like these. If there is a flaw to be found on my side it would be me being lazy. Instead of hosting the domains on my own DNS servers I chose to use theirs. Big deal.
GD has its flaws, absolutely, but when it comes to domain registrations and SSL certificates then they're doing a pretty decent job in my book. Their virtual servers otoh, now that's a completely different story.
At least they're /working/ on it
I have several domains registered with GoDaddy and also experienced a massive outage. No fun at all. Fortunately for me most of my domains are already back up again, a few hours after it all happened. I think that's pretty decent knowing how hard it can be to fight off a DDoS.
Quite frankly the way they handle things is proof to me where they put their priorities. My websites are back up, the GoDaddy.com site isn't (at the time of writing); only displays a warning that they're aware of the issues.
For me this translates that they put all their effort on their customers, and will worry about their own stuff at a later time. IMO that suits them.
As to the DDoS... Pretty lame in my book, the work of dumb scriptkiddies who are best ignored. Wouldn't surprise me if the whole thing backfired; common users getting annoyed with anonymous while actually giving GD the benefit of the doubt.
"Doing so, they argued, will ensure apps are there once the hordes arrived, meaning a better chance of colossal sales."
But sales of what? The apps or Windows 8 as a whole (which also includes the sale of developer subscriptions) ?
Why would you want to pay MS in order to have a presence on their marketplace while you can ship your software free of charge if you continue to target the desktop (which is what most people are still using) ?
Lame decision IMO
"But unless the user actively turns it off – or on – the advertisers can choose to ignore the default setting, Fielding argues."
I think its a very lame argument. You can think of Microsoft what you want but they have shown time and time again that when it comes to privacy concerns they're taking their job very seriously. From their web services as SkyDrive where the policies clearly show that whatever you put up there will always remain yours, right to their mobile environment (Windows Phone 7.5) where all tracking options are either turned off by default, or it comes up with the question to turn it on at first use (Microsoft is interested in your browsing history, virtual keyboard usage, speech recognition history, etc.).
Has Fielding ever considered that the only reason Microsoft did what they did could also be an honest attempt at protecting their users?
I would have expected a much more professional approach than this to be honest.
"It's been my experience as a system admin that many of my fellow admins consider public key cryptography a black art."
And yet you claim those would still (consider to) use self-signed certificates (a /lot/ more work) instead of simply applying for one at a regular SSL provider? I consider that to be quite unlikely.
Because most fellow admins I came across (the kind of people you mention here; who apparently don't quite see that the SSL structure is in the end a simple form of public key encryption) wouldn't trust a self signed certificate over that from a recognized SSL provider. Because you know; those are the official certificates, and thus much safer.
Sorry, but your story doesn't quite add up for me.
Shouldn't be much of an issue...
Simply because most SSL key providers (GoDaddy being my main example) have been enforcing a minimum key length of 1024 for years now.
I think the only situations which could be affected is when people generated a self-signed certificate simply because of the ease and not so much of the security aspects.
You forgot to mention another (IMO) very important issue though; it seems to me as if Ballmer doesn't even realize what attracts some of his customers to use the products the company produces. Would that be a small aspect of their total services then I could understand it, but this is (IMO) a major key asset which he ignores time and time again....
I'm talking about the timespan in which Microsoft manages to support their products. Whether you like or dislike Windows I'm sure we can agree on one thing: keeping an OS alive for approx. 13 years (XP) and supplying a predicted lifespan of 7 years for Windows 7 (released 2009, support lasts till 2018) is an impressive feat. In fact, I'm sure that this is something why some people would favour Microsoft software products over others.
Now take the Windows Phone... How hard could it be to imagine that the release of WP7 would attract such kind of customers, especially given the strict hardware demands MS laid out ?
Yet it seems that was too much for Ballmer. Released in 2010 and nearly EOL'd in 2012, that's only 2 years. Given the fact that developers need to cough up $100,-/year to be even allowed to access their own phone for personal development one has to wonder here... How likely is it that when WP8 is out people would still develop software for WP7.5? So IMO this is effectively killing the WP7 market.
I think Ballmer doesn't even realize that this is heavily affecting his market. I'm a WP7.5 user and I'm still pretty happy with my phone. But I know many others who aren't anymore... I follow several WP related forums and other media, and I can say this move has stirred some very bad blood.
Where are the admin tools?!
I smell a little fail here.
While I applaud the course Microsoft is taking where they're basically stripping the GUI (or what's left of it anyway) from the server environment I get the feeling they're ignoring an important part of the process.
Say I grab Server 2012 and put it on my network which currents contains Win7 and WinXP clients and some older Win2k3 servers. So how exactly am I going to administrate this server, considering that there are new tools and scripts to be used ? (put differently and more ontopic: new roles to keep in mind, new specific admin features to use (which should be addressed within the MSC admin scripts), etc.).
Usually you'd get yourself 'RSAT' (Remote Server Administration Tools) which are a very fine collection of tools which you can use to administrate specific aspects of your server remotely. But guess what? When it comes to Server 2012 there is a RSAT version which specifically addresses this, but its only available for the customer preview of Windows 8.
The Windows 7 version of RSAT still sits on version 1.0 SP1, thus being able to administer server ranging from Win2k3 right to the current Server 2008 release.
Wouldn't it have made a /little/ more sense to release both the server and the admin tools at the same time, especially considering that the default installation behaviour is core mode?
Oh, and don't my word for it. Simply search MS download center for rsat yourself (link to MS download center).
In other news...
People who try to train their brains with puzzles and other trouble-solving issues are likely to keep clear as well.
Is this really the computer or the people who simply continue to actively use their brains (no pun intended) ?
Although I upvoted you because I agree; personal attacks should be left out of a good discussion, I do want to raise the awareness that personal attacks are also something used by Torvalds himself sometimes.
Lets take his criticism over the interface: "And I can get panel settings and enable auto-hide so that I don't need to look at that butt-ugly thing that has clearly been designed by some goth teenager that thinks that black is cool.". Or the simple fact that Mr. Torvalds considers the whole interface an 'unholy mess' "I have yet to meet anybody who likes the unholy mess that is gnome-3.".
Or what about: "If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it.".
I think some of that goes pretty border line too here and there. I mean; I can see why someone doesn't like Gnome, but to start attacking the whole interface and its developers merely because you don't like it seems a bit far fetched to me as well.
For example; I dislike Windows 8, I hate its new touch interface, but you won't see me state something that its developers or designers are idiots or dumb teenagers or such. What I /would/ state is that I think they were so obsessed with touch they forgot all about the desktop. But that's something completely different.
As for myself I don't care either way since my desktop sits on Windows 7. Even so; I can see why someone would be ubercritical towards Torvalds after having read all that.
Speaking of which; why do most people speak of Torvalds posts as "public Google+ posts" while you can't even read them without a Google+ account? Doesn't look very public to me.
Your information is dated. On Windows XP users ended up with an admin aka root account, but Vista and Win7 have changed that behaviour quite heavily.
And lets please also not forget that during the times of XP Linux distributions didn't enforce users to create an account for themselves yet.
Quite frankly I also can't believe that you're actually thinking that the capability of locally running code on Linux would be a lesser problem than running code on Windows. Because that is assuming that there are no local root exploits - what so ever - available on Linux right now. Can you be 100% positive of that? I don't think so...
Being able to run code locally, no matter what the platform is, is bad news. Whether this is on Windows, Linux, Mac or BSD*, the whole ordeal is bad and a huge security risk which needs to be addressed ASAP.
Why not blame Oracle?
While the author puts the blame on Java as a whole I think its Oracle which really deserves a good portion of the blame.
After all; let us not forget that some exploit options were already known by them around last April this year. And it took them months before they actually fixed it (tried to at least).
So I think you're going a little bit too easy on them if you don't blame Oracle at all.
"So allowing a browser plugin to execute priviledged code from a non priviledged account ISN'T a problem with the OS?"
Well, that heavily depends.
Technically speaking Linux also allows execution of privileged code from a non-root account through the use of sudo. So the concept as a whole isn't bad perse. The real question is how its done. On Windows 7 (UAC) people are warned up front for both executing code from a web location as well as raising their privileges to the admin user.
If we're talking about a way to easily circumvent UAC so that code can be executed as administrator without so much as a warning then yes; that would be a major flaw. But not the concept by itself.
"java cannot be done secure".
You do realize that this crap only affects Java 7 and not the previous SE6 ?
A tad obvious, still...
For the obvious part; it should be obvious. XP isn't being sold, Win7 on the other hand still is so it was only a matter of time before one would overtake the other.
Still, I think its well deserved and to me (for whatever that's worth) it shows that the market isn't stupid. When I bought my current desktop PC it came with Vista (Home-Premium) pre-installed. At first I used this for a games machine, after I got my PS3 I used it for dedicated 'Windows stuff'. Even later I actually started using it for my common desktop and for my hobby (synthesizer / DAW usage & synthesis study in general).
Fun part is that only /after/ I upgraded to Windows 7 professional I finally realized the major differences between Vista & 7. No kidding; on some aspects (multimedia for example) these are huge.
Quick example: I have my DAW ('sound software') setup to generate some percussion using samples, a bass line using a (software) synthesizer and some lead sounds using a so called "VST" (software synthesizer but this time a plugin, so 3rd party stuff). I also applied some sound effects to all three tracks. On tops all tracks some together on the 'master' where I applied a 'Compressor' sound effect to keep the overall volume a bit in check (meaning: making sure that I don't have too big extremes in volume).
Vista CPU load, with all my hardware attached (controllers, keyboard, USB soundcard): 70 - 90%.
Win7 CPU load (same as above): 10 - 20%.
When I was still using Vista I didn't consider upgrading, but after I had I was actually glad I did.
Next you'll tell us they will make a larger version and call it the Broadcast Energy Transmitter (B.E.T.) and get some specialized military personnel guarding it. Which of course fails and the BET will get captured by a "ruthless terrorist organization determined to rule the world".
And before you know it G.I. Joe the movie (wikipedia link) suddenly isn't so much science fiction after all!
No need to worry IMO.
Of course we should be weary when it comes to stuff like this, but the license agreement is IMO a lot better than others. And I also think people search too much into this.
First of all its important to determine who owns the material you upload. Microsoft is very specific here:
"Content includes anything you upload to, store on, or transmit through the services, such as data, documents, photos, video, music, email, and instant messages (“content”). Except for material that we license to you that may be incorporated into your own content (such as clip art), we do not claim ownership of the content you provide on the services. Your content remains your content, and you are responsible for it.".
Simply put; I always keep copyright on the contents I upload and store on MS' services. As such Microsoft simply cannot use such material for other purposes than those provided by the service I'm using. If they would they'd violate their own policy which grants me full ownership and copyright.
Then the dreaded paragraph mentioned by the article:
"When you upload your content to the services, you agree that it may be used, modified, adapted, saved, reproduced, distributed, and displayed to the extent necessary to protect you and to provide, protect and improve Microsoft products and services."
I hope we all /do/ realize that if Microsoft creates a backup of my material they're basically reproducing it. If Microsoft puts my material onto a backup service to make sure everything continues to work they're basically (re)distributing it. When I upload pictures and one of MS services changes the resolution from, say 2048x1536 to 1024x768 then they're changing the content.
What I also consider very reassuring is the section which explains the "Can Microsoft remove contents from the services":
"Yes. We may ask you to remove your content from the services if it violates this agreement or the law. Failure to comply may result in loss of access to, or cancellation of, the services or your Microsoft account. Additionally, Microsoft may remove your content without asking you if we determine it's in violation of this agreement or the law, or if we receive a notice of intellectual property infringement from a third party."
I don't see this as anything intrusive at all to be honest. All I'm seeing here is Microsoft covering themselves and rightfully so.
But most of all... Will Microsoft disclose my personal information to others? You know; like Google basically does; using my information to allow others to target me with specific advertising. Well, they won't:
"You consent and agree that Microsoft may access, disclose, or preserve information associated with your use of the services, including (without limitation) your personal information and content, or information that Microsoft acquires about you through your use of the services (such as IP address or other third-party information) when Microsoft forms a good faith belief that doing so is necessary (a) to comply with applicable law or to respond to legal process from competent authorities; (b) to enforce this agreement or protect the rights or property of Microsoft or our customers; or (c) to help prevent a loss of life or serious physical injury to anyone."
I actually applaud this. Especially section (c) is something I can fully support and I think it shows a little bit of the reasoning behind their policies that they explicitly included this section. They could have simply limited themselves with "We'll follow the law" but instead decide to go the extra mileage.
So quite frankly; I don't think its fair to compare these policies to those of Google.
Who says he skipped because of the jailtime? I think its most likely that he skipped because of the fine of millions of dollars.
Agreed on the live tiles; in contrary to what the author claims these really have an added value. But obviously if you're not going to use applications which make good use of it you won't be able to see it.
WeatherMaster for example also allows you to pin your current GPS location to the start screen, which is how I use it. So even if I spent the night somewhere else; the next morning I can still see what kind of weather it is around me, merely by looking at my startscreen.
"if the general population would find your actions funny - its trolling."
Odd comment for someone singling out the media and "non-internet users".
No, that's not trolling. Trolling is something often done so that most people don't notice that they're being provoked. And in general; when people find out that 'THBT' they usually do not consider it very funny. In most cases they get a little upset or annoyed because they wasted their time on some nobody nitwit while there were plenty of others more deserving of their time.
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets with glowing KILL RAY
- Hands on Satisfy my scroll: El Reg gets claws on Windows 8.1 spring update
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA
- 166 days later: Space Station astronauts return to Earth
- What did you see, Elder Galaxies? What made you age so quickly?