1826 posts • joined 19 Dec 2010
"Now. Where can I buy this or something similar?"
No idea about something similar; but concerning this device: have you tried clicking the "Find your nearest dealer" option yet?
Have to say that the question kind of puzzles me, considering that the solution seems to be very obvious.
And if you need to find more online prices (or stores) then why not ask Google? You know, like this.
No offense intended here, but it really looks to me as if your main question is a bit obvious.
I'll believe in a conspiracy...
...When it has been proven beyond doubt that the next major Windows release has undone itself (either entirely or partly) from the TIFKAM horror.
Even so; it could be more than TIFKAM alone I think. Don't forget that with Windows 8 also came a new "display theme"; clearly visible in Office 2013 and Visual Studio 2012 (why they ever decided to let a developer platform follow the look & feel standard of the consumer product line is way beyond me).
And although taste differs I can't say that I'm very thrilled about that new look and feel. Not at all; especially since it seems to consist of removing all colours and nuances and making the interface as dull and flat as possible.. Yech.
I never understood...
What kind of moron would watch pr0n movies at work?
This seems to be happening quite a lot recently. Only a few months ago a Dutch professor got into trouble at the Uni in Wageningen because he basically did the same thing; watching pr0n on his laptop while forgetting that the laptop was connected to the main screen.
I mean; don't you have better things to do while being at work?
That's Sun, not Oracle...
"LibreOffice, the open source office suite created by disaffected Oracle developers".
LibreOffice was an OpenOffice fork and one done in direct response to Oracle's take-over of Sun Microsystems. I strongly doubt that the majority of developers were Oracle employees at that time.
I know I'm nitpicking a little bit, but it's stuff like this which helps people forget or even change the actual history.
Because what's next? OpenOffice was developed by Oracle and then sold or given away to Apache?
"You can agree on the price of bananas even if they don't all look the same"
Most of the banana's I see in the store are usually green. Which basically means they're not really ripe yet (one of the reasons I hardly buy bananas).
So does this mean we can also sell unfinished cloud solutions ("just pay up and we'll finish it later..")?
I can see Ballmer now...
"I told you getting rid of TechNet was a good idea.. Only one day after we decided to whack it and Windows 8 sales are already surpassing Vista!".
The sad part? Although this is meant as a joke I'm somewhat serious here. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if some beancounters actually draw these kind of conclusions.
It gets even worse...
If you own a PS3 and bought a Ubisoft game you'll get a nice automated setup to get into their Ubinet or whatever its called. Totally automatic; they set everything up for you.
Of course they somehow link your PSN account with a Ubisoft account, effectively picking up some information which is already present in your PSN account.
So what password is being set? I don't know. What information is being used? I assume my e-mail address, but apart from that: I don't know.
Welcome to modern gaming; where they will fuck up everything for you, no need to do anything but to click register and enter your unlock codes (otherwise you can't play the game obviously).
So I changed my PSN password just in case, but if that somehow disrupts their ubinet or whatever crap they got then screw them.
Re: Haswell the ghost
"There is a world of difference between what a user 'Wants' and what they really 'Need'.
My guess is that you want a Haswell Netbook/Ultrabook but do you really need one?"
From a reseller perspective: who cares? If there are people willing to buy then the most logical course of action is to make that stuff available.
Nah, the real issue here is that my company is a (small!) Microsoft reseller. Of course with the recent TechNet announcement it remains to be seen if we'll keep that up, but that's a different subject.
Quite frankly I'd rather spend my time working on my 2k8R2 experiences since there is a very reasonable chance I get to use it, rather than wasting my time on something I'd recommend my customers not to buy in the first place.
"Have you downloaded the Windows 8.1 preview and what do you think?"
I didn't even bother anymore because I simply don't see the point.
They fooled me once with the customer preview, they fooled me twice with the developer preview (basically all the mumbo jumbo marketing nonsense surrounding it), but guess what? I won't be fooled again; I got better things to do.
The way I see it none of the complaints which people had regarding to desktop usage have been addressed. Well, their loss.
I'll bet its done to get more attention to the user forums ;)
Honestly, I've been a regular poster here for quite some time (I personally enjoy El Reg better than Slashdot), but I think this is the first time I was looking for a non-article thread like this ;)
I do like the way they now show the most favoured posts right below the article. I think that change makes sense. The new greyish look.. It's different, I can't say I'm enthusiastic about it, but I also don't dislike it.
The icons however are distracting. It's stupid. There is a good reason why most fora (SMF, PhpBB, vBulletin, etc.) default to showing the name and optional avatar of a writer to the left; because we read from left to right.
So skimming the posts would immediately give me a good idea as to what someone would say. A Microsoft article I liked or agreed with? Then I'd usually ignore the 'Fail' icons, easily spotted.
Is El Reg by any chance running the latest SharePoint or such, and are now inclined to using Microsoft's currently favoured "bare looks"?
Edit: I guess we'll know for sure once they remove all the colour from the icons ;)
I admire your initiative but I doubt it will matter. Even with one of their flagship products, Visual Studio, it took thousands of "feature request votes" (where approx. 400 - 600 is the norm) and even then they didn't reverse their initial decision to strip away all the colours from the program.
Instead they added some extra themes (to make it look more like VS2010), supplied a theme editor for customization and that's it.
"Now everyone please shut up while we prepare for VS2013, the next cool version which you are all going to buy because it's even better than VS2012!".
I'm afraid MS has stopped listening to its customer base and their fanbase a long time ago. And quite frankly, I don't think they have what it takes to run their company in an "Oracle like fashion". Oracle never had deep ties with any community because they were never a "consumer player", but Microsoft otoh. is (think Windows, XBox, Office, etc.).
Display of incompetence...
I do agree with the author that it sure looks that Microsoft is going out of their way in search for more money because it indeed loses its monopoly position.
However, the way they do it shows how braindead they really are. These are dark times in my opinion. Because if you're losing the edge then I'd say the last thing you want to do is make yourself less popular. Instead focus on that part and make sure that people still want to use and sell your products.
To me TechNet wasn't merely a source of software for evaluation; it was a /constant/ source of software for evaluation on a wider range than merely the "latest and greatest". This is going to hurt them even more than they may realize I think.
What I mean with that?
My company is a Microsoft reseller. My core business is website hosting and in-house systems administration. At my home office I run Win7 and Office 2010. So what to do when I have a job coming up where a customer still runs XP and Office 2007 or 2003 and I need to prepare for something specific?
Then I download this software from TechNet, setup a test environment and prepare myself to working with the customers environment. I save the serials in OneNote and when I'm done the software gets removed again.
Obviously that is not going to work any more. The new evaluation centre only provides the latest software for, well, evaluation to determine if you're going to buy it or not. That's not what I'm doing; I'm using it to evaluate how a customer environment looks and feels and to prepare me for my job.
Not only doesn't that centre provide older (or current!) software; the time limit also makes it useless for me. I don't use software 180 days straight. But I might use it for 180 days in total, spread out over 2 or 3 years or so. But obviously that won't be possible: I imagine that once you start your evaluation the clock ticks for 180 days straight. And when it runs out you're done.
Its pathetic. You can't even grab Server 2008R2 from there, even though that is still quite a mainstream product.
The next "alternative" is the virtual labs. Evaluation online. "No need to install a thing". But like, that's exactly one of the aspects that I'm after: getting experience up-front so that I can somewhat prepare myself before going on-site where the customer pays by the hour.
This is going to cost Microsoft a lot more money than they bargained for I think.
Do you really think I'll continue to promote MS Office (2013) if I can no longer do any easy test runs myself (I'm still on 2010 myself and that's not going to change)?
I can see it now... "Sure, I can come over and set up MS Office for you. Let's see, that's going to take me at least 3 hours, excluding the price of Office. I know it sounds ridiculous; but I'll have to do all preparations on site. What's that? Making sure that your environment can actually /run/ Office 2013, I can no longer do this from here. Sorry. Yeah, at E 80/hours plus the software costs its going to get expensive, I know. What? Office 365? Nah, what I'd recommend is considering to get OpenOffice. It's a free office suite and one which I know will run on your environment because I already tested it myself. What? Nah, the software is free and I think I'll be done within the hour. Maybe 2 if you also want some instructions. Well, just look at it this way: the extra E 80,- for an hour of instructions is basically paid by what you're saving with not purchasing Office 2013, which costs much more than that. Yeah, it's fully compatible, no problems there.".
Does Microsoft really think I'll just tell my customers to get a subscription with them while there's still honest money to be made for myself? I don't think so.
Your loss Microsoft.
I'm not saying it is the correct strategy. However, it is not wrong either.
Oh but it is, it is wrong on so many accounts.
Because what you overlook in this statement is Microsoft's core customerbase. Not looking at the depth of their pockets but simply at their sheer numbers: the end users.
Windows still is one of the most widely used operating system. And many small players, my company included, use that to leverage our own business. For me TechNet is a key asset in my company (you guessed it; mainly aimed at systems administration).
I think this is a very wrong strategy. Microsoft seems to be overlooking an obvious issue... If you have a $600 product and you manage to sell 2 you have a $1200 revenue (not a profit perse mind you).
But if you lower said price to, say $400 or $300 you might very well be able to sell a whole lot more (depending on the product). If we stick to $400 and you then manage to sell 4 products you now have made $1600 revenue.
These are but small numbers, now try to think even bigger.
Trying to gross in more money doesn't automatically mean that you'll do so by getting the same sales amounts. What is also very important to realize is that big sales more than often start small.
"Yes. They still keep telling each other that next year linux will own the desktop."
But they are making progress. Just check the response to, say, Unity (Gnome desktop) and compare that response to the current of the "desktop standard" OS Windows 8.
Gnome was first in introducing something which made their users run away, and Microsoft followed up on it.
The last Airbender
For me there is only one true Avatar and it's most certainly not this sci-fi remake of Pocahontas (personal opinion).
And that involves the story around Aang, the last Airbender, from a fantasy world where there are only 4 nations which each have mastered control ("bending") over one of the four ancient elements: Fire, Water, Earth and Air.
What makes this animation series a true classic in my opinion is the way its being played out. It touches "adult" topics such as things like oppression, warfare, the ancient "power corrupts and total power corrupts totally", but also gives us an insight to the wide variety in a world. Different nations, different people, different habits.
The best parts about this series, in my opinion of course, are the fact that it actually has an ending, the eye for details (it spans 3 seasons, which matches the 3 nations (the Air nomads had been wiped out by the Fire nation)) and...
So you follow the series and learn almost from the first episode that the fire nation are the main oppressors here. They murdered the Air nomads for no other reason but to stop the next incarnation of the Avatar. Then they started invading the nations of the water tribes and eventually also directly assaulted the Earth nation in an attack which would most likely have taken millions of casualties (the "Scorched Earth" technique).
So what would you expect when you'd visit this fire nation? A whole country of power hungry and war-eager people ready to chop of the heads of any outlander?
More than often the activities of a government don't always have the support of all their citizens. Something which Avatar managed to bring to the viewers attention in a more than excellent way. There is a war? People go on with their lives, the only thing they do hope for is that their family will be home soon.
THAT is Avatar for me.
When the Americans demanded access to every bit of privacy sensitive information regarding EU citizens then there was no problem at all. I've never been to the US and quite frankly with the current state of affairs I also wouldn't want to go there, but even so the US government still wanted to gain access to my bank accounts. We all might be terrists after all.
But now, when its happening to the upper brass themselves, all of a sudden we're in a panic. How typical.
To be honest, given the -IMO- paranoia state of the US I can to some extend understand that they're bugging buildings in Washington. I don't agree with it, but I can see where it's coming from. In fact, I think it was to be expected. After all; its not as private as an embassy.
Still, the rumours that they even infiltrated in several buildings in Brussels is taking it one step too far in my opinion. That almost brings back memories of old Mother Russia where diplomats simply expected to be bugged.
I recall reading a story about a Dutch politician who was on a business trip to Moscow (we're talking the 70's here) and on the last day in his hotel he started talking to his wife how cool it could be if the Russians would give him some Caviare as a 'going away present'. Even mentioned a completely random brand which he just read about that very day in a paper.
Guess what he got before departure, with compliments of the Russian state?
And you, uhm, also checked your bank account just to be safe? ;-)
I'll be back
For more money.
I can see it now...
User is at home? Check!
User is behind his/her computer? Check!
IP address is known with Microsoft? Check!
Users PC is running Windows 7? Check!
Mood: You suffer from suppressed moments of anxiety.
Advice: It's because your computer isn't as effective as it could be, and your subconscious knows this. Fortunately you don't need to seek professional help, just get a Windows 8 license, unlock your true potential and change the way you work forever!
[2 months later]
User is at home? Check!
User is behind his/her computer? Check!
IP address is known with Microsoft? Check!
Users PC is running Windows 8? Check!
Mood: You suffer from depression.
Advice: Consider seeking professional help.
[user thinks: man, this application is GOOD]
"Further, if you disregard the noise of Start menu debates, there is obvious merit in concepts like sandboxed apps easily deployed from an app store"
What merits would that be? Or better put: apart from the merits for Microsoft themselves, which obviously sits in the middle of the revenue of both customers who might pay to buy software as well as developers who have to pay to sell software...
I don't see much merits for customers, apart from some ease of use. But that ease comes at a hefty price, because which company controls what does and doesn't get into the appstore? Leading up to: Would Microsoft allow Apache to push OpenOffice into their appstore? Let's say during launch of their possibly upcoming own version of an metro stained Office?
There is a dark side to all this, and that goes double if we're talking about desktop usage.
Don't forget that big changes start slow. And I sure would NOT enjoy the moment when we suddenly discover that Windows 12 (to name a random future release) no longer provides any means to install software yourself APART from either using the appstore or an Enterprise environment.
That is the kind of risk I'm seeing here. And as said: it starts slow. An optional app store, what will be the next move though?
How long before...
We'll get the lame rhetoric again: "Our partners don't understand our vision and great leadership!"?
A better question: How long before Ballmer will finally realize that the time of dictation is truly behind them?
"trouble is, most people when they buy a PC have this turd pre-installed and they are not given an alternative. Microsoft play the games with manufacturers to keep their virtual monopoly intact."
Agreed, but that sense of security is crumbling. People start to realize that they can also wait it out (Windows 7 vs. Windows 8) or better yet: ignore the thing all together and get something different such as a tablet.
Microsoft still seems to be relying on this particular sales model, but the times have changed drastically.
Does the author actually know how TechNet & MSDN work?
"MSDN and TechNet subscribers can download the preview version now, but you certainly won't be able to deploy the final version for free."
And why wouldn't people subscribed to either TechNet or MSDN be able to deploy the final version for free? We can already do that with version 2012, why would R2 be any different?
Because that is exactly how these environments work. I quote: "Microsoft TechNet Subscriptions help IT Professionals confidently evaluate Microsoft software and plan deployments.", which basically means so much as being able to deploy software and operating systems in specific environments for evaluation and testing purposes. What software you ask? Well: "Microsoft full-version and beta software, with no feature limits". It's this reason why I can easily pick up a full version of Server 2012 right now if I want to. And this has now been extended with the 2012R2 preview and essentials preview versions.
MSDN works basically in the same way, although the focus isn't on the software itself but the purpose to develop software for it: "Software, services and support – you get the complete package for all your development and testing needs." and what do you know? If you check out the MSDN subscriber download page you'll get a good overview of some of the stuff available to MSDN subscribers.
The main difference is the approach. Where TechNet provides a wide variety of software for testing and evaluation, MSDN focusses on development platforms and software for development purposes (you don't only get to download Visual Studio for example, you'll get licenses to grab an accompanying Windows version as well).
SO I don't know where the author got his wisdom from but it doesn't make much sense to me.
Quite frankly I think the real issue here is media coverage. So I would translate that first sentence into: "I'm not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker, as long as the media is hot on his trail".
That's probably part of Obama's latest political move; trying to make the word "hacker" to sound as negative as possible. Then, when he can eventually announce "We got the hacker" he probably expects everyone to be cheering again.
Let me fix that for you...
"Rapid release cadence is absolutely fundamental to what we're doing"
I beg to differ. It has become fundamental for you because of what you're doing. And what Microsoft is currently doing is releasing products over their entire range which their customers would rather avoid best as they can. And it's getting out of hand I think.
This isn't about people disliking certain changes any more, in my opinion Microsoft is alienating themselves from their own customer base, even their own fans, and it's becoming dangerous I think. Visual Studio 2012? Most developers prefer not to upgrade but to stick with 2010 because of the better interface, and given that VS2010 supports .NET 4.0 as well you can also easily it together with modern Windows versions. Of course 2012 becomes a requirement when developing for Windows 8, but who's going to do that? New developers, like myself, will have no choice but to buy this version because 2010 is no longer available, or they need to grab an MSDN subscription. I know some people did just that solely for grabbing 2010 and took the extra's (software licenses) as a bonus. But it was 2010 they were after.
Xbox One anyone? I'm a PS3 user and although I prefer the environment you won't find me trashing the Xbox. In this case there was also no need what so ever, because Microsoft's own Xbox fans were doing that themselves after the news of all the Xbox One tie ins (no second hand games, constant internet connection, etc.). Sure; Microsoft reversed some of those decisions, but the initial act remains. And the damage has been done; because all console users know that if you buy a gaming console then chances are high that its functionality will change over the years.
And what does Microsoft do? Instead of realizing what is going on they're going to release more products over a shorter time period. And I don't think it's hard to guess what their motivations are: more money. They're going to need it if no one is buying their stuff any more.
But honestly: instead of creating more products, why not start with creating better products instead? You know: products which people would actually want to use? Because if even your fans are rallying and openly state that they'll just skip and avoid certain versions, even on your own fora, then something is very wrong here.
Don't go for quantity; try going for quality instead!
I honestly think this is a very dangerous development for Microsoft. Make one product which people don't want and you can calculate the risks involved. Start mass production of that stuff and you may very well head for a big financial impact.
Even so, I do hope I'll be proven wrong. But I have a bad feeling about all this.
They need to add an option to Windows 8 to make it work exactly like Windows 3.1 did - why should I be forced into using Microsofts crappy new "user friendly" UI when what they had before worked perfectly fine for me?
I know you're joking but quite frankly that is exactly what they should have done. Because when Windows 95 came out, which basically introduced the start menu to the masses, it still retained the option to use progman.exe, and that feature has been included with more modern Windows versions for a long time. Some people fell back to that but eventually everyone picked up on the start menu.
But I do believe that this is the main reason why Windows 8 is the catastrophe it is today: people aren't given a choice, so they''re simply making one themselves by not getting involved with Windows 8 at all.
2 click access to device manager, uninstall programs, control panel, System, and so much more.
Unless you're a user like me who uses a non-privileged user account. When I run certain msc files I need to raise my privileges. On Windows 7 this means right click on the option and "run as administrator". With this great Windows 8 that has become impossible because you're already using a context menu (you need to right click to access this menu) yet one which only starts msc files without being privilege aware.
Therefor on Windows 7 its a meagre 3 click option for me: click the start menu, right click (for example) "my computer" and click "manage". Due to my privileges and because I'm trying to access 'my computer' the system automatically picks up that I need to raise my privileges.
And well; because the control panel sits in my start menu as a menu option I too can reach all these with 2 clicks (start -> hover -> click).
Do almost anything faster
Like what? When working on Windows 7 I heavily use the "recently started programs" section which dynamically changes based on the software I often use. This allows me to almost every time use 2 clicks to start the software I need the most. Better yet: because it's dynamic I don't have to do a thing myself.
Try that with Windows 8.
"At the risk of a bazillion downvotes: This is exactly, pretty much word for word what was said when XP came out by many many people (myself included)."
With one huge difference: XP still provided a working progman.exe, so if you really didn't like the start menu and wanted to go back to the way it was you could.
People had a choice in the matter, even if it did require some in-depth understanding how this stuff works.
Visual Studio 2013?
"The company revealed on Tuesday the availability of Windows Server and System Center 2012 RT, Windows Intune and SQL Server 2014 and Visual Studio 2013.".
Not quite correct. As you can read on Microsoft's techblog they announced the upcoming build preview of Visual Studio 2013, that will be available at the end of the month.
Visual Studio 2013 itself is expected to be available later this year, according to that same blog that is.
Because they would most likely expect a little display of courtesy back. But for some reason I doubt that Google would consider it a bonus if Snowden started to advertise for them ;)
".. they are talking to him in an uncomfortable room about all he knows about the NSA."
Or he's freely giving them any information they want (and as much as he can produce) in exchange for safety on the terminal, to be raised with a scheduled direct flight.
That would be the most likely scenario in my opinion. He's already an unwanted person, so he basically has nothing to lose any more.
I pity the fools who read this news and pick it up as a confirmation that one operating system is better than the other.
"For the most part, in IT, the bad guys won."
I think it's not so much an issue of "bad guys" perse, but more so of people who have little to no affinity with ICT and the tech sector as a whole, and thus only approach things from a business perspective. And business can sometimes be ruthless, but that's just the way its supposed to be in my opinion.
Even so; I think it's that lack of understanding which makes those guys look like "bad guys". Simply because if you know their product by heart and then ask them something about it, even if its not too specific, they more than often cannot answer your question because in the end they know jack shit about it.
That's most likely also why the author could describe a situation where he could talk to the CEO without any marketing drones around. Simply because this CEO knew what he was talking about, thus didn't need any drones to shield him from specific questions.
Based on what I read so far I bet this was also the kind of guy who would easily tell you that he didn't know about a certain issue and only because of that would need to refer you to one of his colleagues. Compare that to what you get these days during presentations when people ask critical yet fair questions...
One question remains though..
"One of the big barriers to using cloud computing is a lack of trust," she said. "People don't always understand what they're paying for, and what they can expect."
But is that caused by a lesser degree of competence from these people, or because some Internet based companies can get away with just about everything? Often in the EU, more than often, do you get to see Internet "ghost" firms which will gladly accept your money but won't deliver any services.
And the worst part (though I can only comment on my local situation of Holland): 9 out of 10 cases the police has no or hardly time for cases like this. Especially because it's usually petty theft and resources to trace these culprits would be quite hefty... Over here the latest report surfaced last week: a few Dutch and Belgian people had booked a vacation with an Internet firm, and that firm is now all of a sudden "gone" and so is their money.
So is this about the companies? Or about an, often EU led, government which refuses to give its citizens the protection they're entitled to and basically try to let others deal with all that?
You like hard questions? ;)
"The hardest question to answer is the simplest: why make the move from Server 2003 to Server 2012?"
Well, I think I can top this one with an even better question: "Why make the move to Server 2012 with its dinkey-toy interface, while you can still get Server 2008R2?".
Not only will the price of purchase be lower, you'll also get a product which was designed to be the direct upgrade for 2003, thus making the upgrade process a whole lot easier per definition. Another thing to keep in mind is the product itself: 2008 has been around for quite some time now, so you can be sure that a lot of the "out of the box" bugs have been addressed by now. Server 2012? Considering the very poor reception it gets I have my doubts there.
Finally there's an even bigger issue to keep in mind: the dreaded End Of Life issue which we're addressing right now. Windows Server 2008R2 extended support ends in 2020, as can be seen here (link to lifecycle page of Microsoft support).
The Windows Server 2012 EOL date on the other end only adds a meagre 3 years, it's support ends in 2023 as you can see here.
Sure, time is money. But not having to deal with the dinkey toy interface that was Metro is also worth a lot of money to a lot of systems administrators. There is much more to this story then "merely upgrading".
In my opinion companies are much better off picking 2008 over 2012.
I disagree for many reasons. The first being the obvious one: people pay to be able to trade on the stock market. So where the article says that in some transactions millions were lost, the other side of such situations is that there were also plenty of people who made lots of money out of it. Its the beauty of the stock exchange in my opinion: almost everything works both ways.
Another aspect is the damage itself. What damage exactly? Trading or investing on the stock exchange involves taking certain risks. You can try to regulate all you want, but its those risks which allow people to either make or lose lots of money. Regulating only means postponing the inevitable.
And that's problem number two: If you regulate the amount of trades people can make you're not only blocking possible losses, but also blocking possible profits. Because having the option to purchase many stocks in one go is a good way for a trader / customer to invest and for the company which sells those stock to make some profit out of this.
And it's those profits why most people trade on the stock exchange in the first place.
"Oracle had earlier forecast software sales growth of as much as 11 per cent, but the actual figure was just 1 per cent, bringing the total to $4bn in new software sales."
I can't help wonder if this would include software sales from Sun (and in my opinion Sun had plenty of quality software for sale besides Solaris).
Because if this would be true then for me it would be the perfect example as to how far the oracle arrogance can go.
I mean; every former Sun customer knows that the moment oracle took over prices were raised almost two folded, and even higher after that. I was lucky and had the option to bail, I know many other companies weren't that fortunate.
So I can't help wonder.. Because if my assumptions are right I wouldn't be surprised at all if we can look forward to a steadily decrease in software sales, going down as it goes and if I had anything to say about it eventually hitting rock bottom, hopefully with a bang too.
And for the record: No, I don't like oracle at all.
Both the article as well as the development. Although I'm very sceptical about the continuous "we're running out of IPv4, the Internet blows up tomorrow" (and nothing happens the day after) I still think it's a good thing that some companies (and projects) started paying serious attention to IPv6.
I'm somewhat proud to say that very soon all of my customer websites (and my own of course!) will be accessible using both protocols.
Either way, I think it's quite refreshing to read a story which shares both the strong and weak points of a new development. I was especially interested in your (author) display of interest in the possible potential. Because in my opinion a lot of Microsoft developments show high potential, in a lot of cases its poor marketing (and "after-sales") which turn it into a disaster.
No offense but...
I want to have as little to do with Google as possible.
And only once you start thinking about how that might be done will you realize "how deep the rabbit hole goes".
This.. I was thinking the same thing.
Many people overlook something very nasty yet also very important with console gaming: stuff changes over time.
I think that's a very dangerous (and sometimes unwanted) development, but seems to happen all over the place. My best (but dated) example is a PS3 game called "Gran Turismo 5". Its a very cool racing game, but when I bought it most races had a grid start, I loved it. In the mean time someone apparently didn't agree and now almost every race has a rolling start, something I really do not enjoy at all. Of course this happened half a year or so after purchase, so even if I wanted to (I don't) I couldn't get a refund.
But the same thing happens on your consoles. Although it doesn't bother me at all the PS3 used to have an option which allowed people to install an "other" operating system. That functionality has been removed over time; even consoles can change.
So before anyone starts countering your argument I think they should keep this in mind as well; with consoles you can't be sure that the thing you bought will continue working as you expected it to.
What a load of nonsense...
"It seemed so plausible, but for most of us the savings never arrived. Why not?"
That heavily depends on the market. The article sounds as if you're targeting the whole industry, and if so it would be a clear sign of ignorance.
We're not saving eh? Ok, then let me spell something out for you.
In the old days you could only opt for either website hosting (getting your own private, but limited, webspace) and if you required more the only available options left were either hiring a server, or getting one of your own and make that available somehow.
The differences are even visible today. Take GoDaddy. They provide dedicated servers for you to use. Of course a decent one (8GB memory, 2x 1TB HDD, 10TB/month data traffic) will cost you approx. E 160,- / month at the time of writing.
GoDaddy also provides Virtual Private Servers and that shows a clear difference. Although the specifications are often lower you also pay a lot less. In this case a 'Deluxe' server would cost you approx. E 50,- / month. So you could easily opt to getting 3 servers instead of one.
So now you can get a full (virtual) server of your own to do as you like, while paying a whole lot less when you get yourself a physical server.
How is this not saving? How more obvious than this can it possibly get?
Sure, I know what's up. The article most likely talks about companies with in-house servers who more than often now get into contact with virtualization options but won't save a dime if they don't know how to use it. But that's not what the article told us, it basically addressed the whole market.
In the end it depends on the situation at hand if you'll be able to save up or not. The tool doesn't make the solution, it can only provide one. But that doesn't automatically make it the right solution for every problem.
At least it's good for something...
All those "business analysts" are having the time of their live, selling their "wisdom" to anyone who wants to have it.
"It is legally bound, under higher laws which it has acceded to, as part of its United Nations obligations, to accept the transfer of political refugees to the country which granted asylum,".
Makes me wonder what those higher laws actually are. But if he feels this way; why not start a prosecution?
I think he's totally off though. Because if you look closely you'll see that there still is no "official" system in place which regulates the use of immunity. For example; because of the immunity of ambassadors and their cars they normally also don't have to worry about parking violations. As a result plenty of diplomats basically allow their cars to be placed "where possible", even if it's officially not allowed.
Yet there are also many countries which don't tolerate such behaviour and demand that their own embassy personal pays up for their own traffic tickets. And there are also host countries which use alternative means to enforce the law. In Holland it's not uncommon for a diplomatic car to get towed away. They can't search it but it seems they can move it out of the way.
Or what to think about embassies which hire personal from the host country but immediately make it clear that they can't count on immunity because they're not citizens of the main country?
A small example, but one which clearly shows that there currently is no specific ruling in these matters. Some countries are very strict with upholding diplomatic relationships (not paying for traffic fines) whereas others couldn't care less about "pesky details".
As such, I think Mr. Assange is doing some wishful thinking here, but he seems to be completely off.
Could it be?
All chasing after Bruce Willis perhaps, imagine the disappointment when they finally realize that it was all a movie and not in the least based on the real thing ;-)
"What I can do with Android, however, which I cannot do with iOS or Blackberry or Win Phone 8 - this: I can download the Android source code, inspect it for spyware, modify it to remove it if I wish, compile it and put it on my phone."
Can you really now?
That strikes me as a bit odd, considering that 4.2 has been released almost one year ago.
It's going to be awesome, yeah sure....
When governments start regulating stuff they hardly understand you'll get regulations which the involved sector will hardly understand. And that often results in major annoyances (or worse) for the group which rights those regulations should protect in the first place.
Take a look at the "cookie law"; it's a perfect example. Basically the law states that websites need to warn visitors before they come into contact with tracking cookies ("trackers"). But this regulation does not include cookies which you might need to keep your website running as optimal as possible.
Despite of that most companies basically approached the whole thing with "better to be safe than sorry" and made it involve every cookie on their website. And can you blame them? Because one could argue that every cookie can be used to track people; at the very least you can pick up from which domain they originated (or said to originate).
And as a result we now get to click 'yes' on almost every website. And to make sure they don't track you it's often stored in a cookie with a short expiration date so you can keep clicking yes, which has quickly became user annoyance number 1.
So when that researcher says that: "end users were already preparing for the new rules of the incoming regulation" I think he drew the wrong conclusions. End users aren't getting ready to sue the heck out of the market, I think they're getting ready to browse the web without getting annoying "cookie banners" on every site they visit.
Someone forgot to kill the parent process. That's the only sure way to get rid of defunct processes.
But in the end..
There's always a huge difference between a computer program or a real person. Quite frankly I think that if people really have this kind of problems with their social live they're better of relying on friends or family. If that isn't an option then professional help.
Because actually conversing with a real person will actually make them feel comfortable with the process, because it's real. I don't think this compares at all to a computer simulation.
- NASA rover Curiosity drills HOLE in MARS 'GOLF COURSE'
- +Comment 'Private Facebook' site Ello: There's a REASON we're still in beta. SPAMMERS!
- WHY did Sunday Mirror stoop to slurping selfies for smut sting?
- Business is back, baby! Hasta la VISTA, Win 8... Oh, yeah, Windows 9
- Shellshock: 'Larger scale attack' on its way, warn securo-bods