Kind of like this?
236 posts • joined 3 Jun 2011
Kind of like this?
Move along... move along.
AFAICT their drivers work perfectly well on the worlds most popular OS, but that wouldn't be Windows 10 would it.
Move just outside that urban bubble and things rapidly deteriorate. I live just 3000 meters outside of a medium sized city (it just barely quaifies as "rural") and I HAVE to use LTE or satellite. Here there is no cable, no DSL, and certainly no fibre. There is fibre 3Km to the west and North, but it is not accessible by anyone along its route. My LTE bill is $100.00 a month, and I use it primarily for business. What I pay for is a DL speed "up to" 25 Mb/s and a UL speed "up to" 1 Mb/s. In practice I usually get 6 Mb/s and .25 Mb/s. Those two little words "up to" mean all of the difference to the provider, because in the wee hours of the morning those are the speeds I get.
So I pay a premium monthly fee for an Internet connection that would be fantastic if it was 1995, and I have a good data cap of 500GB (I routinely go over 160GB). The Bell plan I moved away from was much faster on average, cost only $49.00/month, but had a data cap of 40GB and a $5.00 charge for each additional GB over the 40 GB cap. Running a business, downloading system updates, Linux distros, and installations would have seen my monthly bill with Bell around the $650.00 a month mark. The better symmetry was not worth the overage charges.
Ciompetition, is something we Canucks desperately need. Ironic that Vietnam is better off in this field than we are.
In Canada it is the Senate (same function) that is constantly under attack as no longer being useful. Arguments that it should be eliminated or at the very least be replaced by an elected body are constantly being levelled at it. I used to think this way too, until I realized that the people doing all of the protesting were the ones the Senate was inhibiting. Members of Senate, because they are non-elected life-time positions, stand in the way of the elected body and by extension the groups who lobby them for favours. The senate does not answer to the commons and not being under the control of the sitting government means that public opinion is the only way to attack them.
My position on the need for the Senate/House of Lords has changed. Replace the disrespectful "old farts" moniker with the more appropriate term of "elders" and see the concept for what it is; a much needed pool of sober second thought to stabilize the parliamentary system of government; with the ability to take the long view needs of the nation and see past the distractions of the short term. As such they need to remain right where they are.
The ability to select a court that is biased indicates that the system is broken and/or corrupted. The lady holding those scales is supposed to be impartial, that's why she is depicted wearing a blindfold.
Nadella simply realizes that their adverts and lobbying efforts now undermine their own business, full stop.
"The cloud needs consent". Agreed. Yet Microsoft defaults to cloud storage for Windows 8 & 10. Do users get to give consent? Yes, but the question should be "Is user consent consent to default storage to "the cloud" given with an understanding of what is being asked of them"? To that I would say "No".
The article claims that Google is behaving like a bulldozer; I have no love for Google, but isn't it Microsoft that's being the bulldozer? Aren't they pushing users to products laced with "telemetry services" *cough*SPYWARE*cough*, pushing their customers to their new data-mining environment by leveraging their (still) monopoly desktop position? It looks to me like a play straight from the days of IE vs Netscape.
Google, as much as I dislike what they have become, is and has always been exactly what they are; an Internet based company that has products served up remotely from their servers to your browser. The Internet has always been Google's delivery mechanism, indeed they could not exist without it. Microsoft can exist without the Internet.
Microsoft was never an Internet based company, they empowered people with computing on their desktop. Microsoft was slow to take to the Internet, and when they did, they (ab)used their desktop monopoly position to crush the competition. They then tried to lock customers to their browser and extend control by use of browser-specific extensions. *cough*IE6*cough* Web Pages were (and still are) a bad idea. This ultimately hurt Microsoft. This time their previous strategy and accompanying tactics will rapidly demonstrate to the world how two-faced they really are, which, given that they are no longer indispensable, would be a very bad thing indeed.
What to do? Bury the hatchet, spin it as evidence of them being a more friendly and willing to compete company, and carry on carrying on. So, has the leopard changed it's spots? No. Has Google? Also no. In the case of Google it simply grew up, from a cute cuddly cub to a dangerous adult carnivore.
I loath Microsoft, but it was not always the case. They are a company I would really like to be able to stand behind; but I can't. Their lock-in mentality was the start of it, the malware mimicking tactics of their marketing department and Win 10 are just the cherries on top. Bits of the company are changing, but they will be unable to become a completely different animal. I don't think so... if they do begin to have success they could, like an addict, slip back into their old mindset, and I think that is exactly what would happen. They, as IBM has, have to practically fade into the background while remaining a useful contributor. They need to remain a meaningful part of the IT eco-system while not trying to lead the parade; they need to be humble. It will take a brave person at the helm to admit they have screwed up so badly; and I don't think they yet have it in them to do it.
They are behaving in exactly the same manner as the big tech-giants of old. Businesses fail when they become so successful that they think they are incapable of failure, that they can make and do anything with only fanfares and financial gain as the result. Like the companies that came before them, their arrogance will hurt them. IBM still exists, but it is a much leaner company today when compared to its former self, and much less egotistical in its public behaviour. Microsoft may have an ocean of money, but even an ocean will diminish in size when evaporation exceeds rainfall and they will have to dance very long and hard to bring on even small rainstorms. I think Microsoft is very-near the point of no-return when it comes to public-trust, and trust is very difficult if not impossible to regain.
Improve boot times? PUHLEASE! If (IF!) I turn off a system (which is a rare event) it takes less than 1 minute to boot. The servers haven't been off-line for more than a year, so I might save perhaps close to 2 minutes out of the 525 600 minutes in a year? That is NOT a reason for such a massive shift in how things are done.
Logging integrity? Never had an issue with the integrity of the logs. Answer this: "How do BINARY log files improve things"? I now need a special tool to read them so how is my life as a sys-admin somehow improved by this?
What exactly what are the "bunch of other things" you refer to?
<sarcasm>Whose brilliant idea was it to disable /var/log/messages in Mint</sarcasm>? You can (still) re-enable it... BUT IT SHOULDN'T BE DISABLED IN THE FIRST PLACE! Having a console window open with a tail -f /var/log/messages showing you what's complaining as you troubleshoot a problem is incredibly useful. Disable it by default? WTF? Did they think no one would notice? They certainly didn't advertise the change... that knowledge comes the first time you need to check the log. Surprise! Its not there. Oh! perhaps they were aiming their product at the people who rely on folks like me to fix their PC,... and one of the first things people like me want to do is check /var/log/messages!
If there is a SHRED of doubt about a license being compatible then the only 100% safe choice is to not use it. If someone has worded things to be unclear then they have probably deliberately done-so, especially if said lack of clarity would benefit them while screwing you.
Sometimes I wonder how I got to be such a cynic...oh yes! It was by way of observing the greedy-underhanded actions of my fellow men.
Red Hat also thinks systemd and crawling into bed with Microsoft is a good idea. One of those has a history littered with the husks of its partners... the other one is just starting out on it's career path.
[Edit] Sorry, I hit [submit] before seeing others referencing the first point.
"One massive bundled binary".
Exactly! Zero modularity. A massive potential for single point of failure. Systemd is a fine example of good intentions that aren't. To the person who commented about it not being 1970, why are you using *NIX then? Because it is better! Why is it better? Because you have (had) control, it is stable, it is robust and fixable with knowledge and a text editor. Detailed information about what is going on and troubleshooting can be had/done with the mark 1 eye-ball and a system console that, at the very least, speaks ASCII and has an RS232 port on it (finding a modern computer with an RS232 port is another issue).
IMHO systemd is a solution in search of a problem, yes I CAN use it, and because I'm forced to I WILL use it, but I'm now pretty much through flight-testing BSD. If we can't move-forward with a Linux distro that is systemd free then BSD will be the OS of choice for our servers and will also be the direction in which all of our customer's servers are headed.
Please apply the rules evenly. That is all.
"... why only others should change their licenses to make them GPL compatible?"
If someone wants to use GPL2 licensed code in their non-free proprietary product, it is they who are wanting, not the authors of the code they desire the use of. They can either deal with the terms of GPL2 or steal the code and try to conceal the theft by obfuscation, something which never works out well. If they steal it then they have hoisted the jolly roger and shown their true colours.
It might not cause HIM material loss, but it could very well harm the GPL2 eco-system and cause others harm. It wouldn't be the first time that someone sought their fortune by claiming ownership of Linux because their code was included in it by a third party. *cough*SCO*cough*
That hissy fit was in 2010 when there was no HTML5 and Flash was everything. Six years later HTML 5 is here and Flash can be superseded with minimal fuss. The cheese has been moved.
The stroke of a pen can cause the software industry in the U.S. to wither and die. Their products will not be trustworthy. These people would put screen-doors on submarines. Setting up dual lines of development and supply to comply with U.S. only rules would be a nightmare. It would probably be easier to strong arm their "economic partners" into passing the same laws.
That is all.
Annnnd yet another argument that can be used in favor of open source, this time hardware and software. If this thing was open source (GPL2 NOT 3) from the get-go then it could be sustained if abandoned. Hell, it could be improved on and support/development continued.
Business today is of the mindset that the customer exists solely for their convenience. This feeling of entitlement will only lead to tears; their tears.
[Edit: Pretty much says what others have been saying]
"The reality is that most cloud computing is better protected from a security and regulatory standpoint than almost any internal IT I've seen over the years, so it's not the end of the world."
Well external IT suppliers need to be regulated, whereas your own IT department answers only to the needs of your business.
Adding two more external providers to deal with (ISP and Cloud) is not going to make life easier. Oh sure! In the outset, when the provider is hungry, they will bend over backwards for you. What if they can't manage rapid growth and you want/need to leave their cloud? How difficult will it be to do so? Sure! The contract states you "can leave" but that doesn't mean they have to help you. Perhaps you're own IT department can do the work, if short term thinking hasn't eviscerated it. Who has the leverage?
A cloud, used to get a business or new IT application up and running is a good idea; but it should be done with an eye to the horizon. A business needs the ability to take control and sail the vessel with their own crew.
Wasn't that their original motto? The DMCA was signed into effect in 1998, so not 20 years ago, but close. I wonder if the original "Big-Media" would have been better off without it, as the law always protected the copyright holder; the only thing that had changed was how the works were disseminated, but distribution of anothers work without their permission, whether for profit or not, was always a no-no. The DMCA made it ridiculously easy to have works taken down on a say-so, no questions asked. This lead to claims of copyright infringement against original works, having them taken down and thereby preventing artists from being able to distribute on their own. Maintaining the status quo, keeping artists from making a go of becoming independent. SNAFU.
Now the worm has turned, but as usual a combination of things, all with the best of intentions of course, keep content creators from independently profiting off of their efforts. Admittedly some of that "content" is garbage (the vast majority actually), but things like finding your photo being used in a billboard advert without your permission is beyond unethical, as is someone else ordering another's creative work removed on the claim (without onus to prove) that it infringes their own.
As usual, the middle ground is where we want to be, but the pendulum never loiters at the bottom of the arc in the same way it seems to at either end of the swing.
Normal wear and tear is not covered under ANY warranty. Show us anything that warrants against being used up and worn out.. really... anything at all. It also doesn't cover abuse, so no shooting the car and then trying to get them to replace it under warranty. Sheesh!
I can agree on batteries being the expensive weak point, geting those puppies down in price has got to be a high priority. On the upside an electric vehicle only needs a specific DC voltage and amperage input to get it to move. Didn't Tesla open-source it's tech? That would make creating an after market battery pack a viable business proposition, or perhaps creating a replacement unit but made out of super capacitors. You should even be able to use a fuel-cell, just so long as the power it provides meets the spec.
This: ""we have this amazing car, plonk down $1000 and we might deliver something approximating our promises in two or three years."
Mr. Musk says two years, hopefully the cars they had on the stage were the "production ready" examples. If so then it will probably take that much time to design the assembly line, get the logistics figured out, and start ramping it up to speed. Those two years make a pretty tight time line and there is SO much that can go wrong.
Regarding the "Chances are your car will cost a lot more than that when you throw in the extras". That statement is true of every automobile ever sold. Replace "car" with "house" and it's still true.
I got an email from them telling me about the unveiling, if they don't use email to advise those in the queue of delays then they deserve their ire. I can't imagine NOT using email to keep them in the loop... but you never can tell.. stupidity knows no bounds.
I wish them the best of luck.
P.S. No I didn't put any $$ down. I don't own a Tesla, nor do I work for them.
@a_yank_lurker. Agreed, none of the key technology is conceptually new, however, today the materials that go into it and the understanding of the chemistry and physics at work is far ahead of where we were when the Stanley Steamer was in production.
If progress is being stymied it is probably because someone is not doing any of these things.
An electric motor lacks the complex interaction of hundreds of discrete mechanical components found in an internal combustion engine. Being mechanically simpler means improved reliability, less maintenance, and greater operational longevity. The first model year and/or "made on a Monday or Friday" problems, so prevalent in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's does not translate to an electric vehicle made mostly by machines.
Tesla is a low production manufacturer that can take time to make its products correctly, with fewer compromises. They have given the auto-industry a shake from it's complacent slumber. As Bob Lutz said "Suddenley there was the Tesla announcement. Two hundred mile range, zero to sixty in four point something seconds, a hundred and forty mile an hour top speed, six thousand eight hundred and thirty one laptop batteries, and I basically said 'Now wait a minute, I've accepted everybody's arguments as to why we can't do this, but here's this small startup company in California, and they think that they can get all of these figures'".
The "we can't do this" crowd really needs to get out of the way of the people who are doing it.
The majority don't and are being herded (as in with a stick) to adopt it. I've used Linux for Ohhh.. 13 years or so now. It all started when a M$ W2K update borked my PC. I bought a Linux Magazine with Mandrake 10 on the front cover, Windows was working, so it became a dual boot machine for awhile, the rest is history.
Something a Windows user must suffer through is Activation, not that activation itself is so inherently difficult, but that you need to do it at all is the problem. Windows activates by imprinting on specific hardware, like a baby bird imprints on it's mother. Trouble is if that hardware changes too much you have to reinstall and reactivate. Painful.
Contrasting this with the speed with which a Linux machine can get back into productive use should hardware (like the Motherboard) decide to pack it in, is truly astonishing. It happened to me just this past Tuesday.
An ASUS MB decided it would post and pass all RAM checks, but never boot. Chilling some chips down got it to ALMOST boot, but something has decided to pack it in so it's toast.
The system had to get back into service quickly. To this end;
- Swap out the motherboard for one that works
- Power it up
- X failed to start; it couldn't find a graphics card at the old PCI address. (DOH!)
- Use lspci to get the new address of the graphics card
- Edit Xorg config & change the graphics card address.
- Type "startx" at the command prompt aaaaand.... everything works.
Total time spent working on the system?, Two hours (including sourcing another MB).
- No activation
- No software re-installation
- No loss of functionality, in fact the new CPU is a bit faster.
Do THAT with a Windows PC!
Microsoft was nowhere to be seen when I was looking for a RAD Dev Studio kind of environment way back in 2005, only now, 11 years later, do they decide to come to the Linux development party. After funding so many attacks against Linux, coercing Android vendors to pay them for licensing then forcing them to sign an NDA. And did you hear? The SCO Zombie is still claiming they own Linux and are appealing the latest ruling. Didn't Groklaw discover that M$ was allegedly arms-length funding SCO's efforts?
Thanks but no thanks. Now sod off.
Yes you can charge for shipping, but it specifically states;
"for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution"
Taken from the following (Section 3 paragraph "a")
"Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,"
This should effectively keep the shipping cost from becoming a profit-centre.
Users who machines are theirs, i.e.not company machines, have sudo so they can install applications and apply system updates. Those updates come from the repositories (in Linux) and the "Store" with Mac, Android and now Windows. The basic rule of thumb given to new Linux users is this; "Unless you are installing software, and YOU specifically went to the software manager/store to do it, when something asks you for your password be very aware, even suspicious, of why you're being asked for that information".
So far no-one has messed up their machine. Can it happen? Yes. Will it happen? Perhaps. The onus is on them.
I dunno, I think that root is enough, the problems seem to have been introdiuced by tweaking the formula. As someone else pointed out, security has gotten "watered down" in an effort to make life easier, which implies that it was pretty darn good to begin with, Having a user to authorize root? Ummm... no, root should be in control, full stop.
The question "Why did Apple feel that root, administrator of the system, needed to be locked out"? Has not been answered. If the person responsible for the system borks their computer or company server then that is something that they must deal with. If the vendor has given themselves special permissions then I can not trust that my system is under my control. So what other reasons were there?
"As far as Linux goes, I need an OS that can run on my hardware and support all my programs. Linux simply isn't it. There are ALWAYS issues with Linux (including Mint 17.3) whether it's my PC not waking up properly, to unsupported hardware, to graphics issues, and let's not forget iTunes and PC games requiring Direct X."
Well of course if your goal is to run only Windows based software then Linux will never be for you. I'm a fan of no single company or any one company's products. If Microsoft started making software that was robust, if they actually respected their user-base, if they stopped saying one thing while doing another, and if they had an ELUA that I could actually live with, then I would once again consider their products.
Now, point #2, hardware issues with Linux... Hmmm.. can't think of any.. Bluetooth, Wireless. graphics. USB 3, audio, GB ethernet, Laptop HDMI output; all work perfectly. There was that W10 Acer that had a trackpad that wouldn't work... but the user prefers a wireless mouse to do their CAD with, so not a show-stopper... still... that was one instance. Now if we were still in 2005 or 2006 I'd agree with you, especially when it came to webcams and the like, but sadly, it is 2016, and everything (with the rare edge case exception) "just works". As for iTunes and PC Games... well even I have a Windows machine for the games that require it... but games don't hold sway over my IT needs, music even less so.
1. You're in a never-ending game of wack-a-mole. Microsoft is trying to change their business model . Their first step is to monetize the Windows user base. To this end they can be expected to keep changing the telemetry software used to do this in order to get past blockages put in place by those unwilling to have their profiles pimped out. Rolling this out across the enterprise, potentially having your employee's contact lists harvested, each machine's usage, what is on it, and what is done with it monitored and sent back to people who have no business being in your affairs at that level.
2. Funny how a different, but not radically different UI is a show stopper when it comes to adopting Linux but yet when Microsoft does it "you just have to get used to it". I can theme Cinnamon or Mate to look like Windows XP or 7 and get buy in from a newly migrated Windows to Linux user faster than I will get buy-in to Windows 8 or 10; yet the basic principals of usage between Mate and Cinnamon (the look & feel if you will) are not that far off of Win 7, XP, or Vista. Point click, drag & drop, right-click context menu, etc. etc.
3. <sarcasm>You wait 6 whole months before upgrading a production PC?</sarcasm> A production machine has GOT to be rock-solid, so 6 months in is when you should start evaluation testing BEFORE moving on to acceptance testing BEFORE rollout. Big corporate users with tens of thousands of desktops & laptops who roll their own environment, will need absolute control over updates so they can maintain a sustainable environment without blowing the support budget.
Frequent and potentially uncontrollable updates are bad news for an enterprise who needs a stable platform from which to operate.
"I'm seeing corporates who are happy to upgrade from 7 to 10 that refused to touch 8."
I've not seen or heard of one (1) corporate type (the kind who actually has an IT infrastructure, not a one-person corporation) move to Windows X, YMMV; but in general they're not going to, if at all, for YEARS! Why? Because the corporation depends on it working while;
1. It must not spew or attempting to harvest information for consumption by third parties
2. it must not compromise their network any more than the legacy OS has, in fact it should be capable of less functionality in this regard.
3. It must work with all Applications and peripherial devices in use across the enterprise.
"Now as for PC sales, well that has nothing to do with Windows 10."
You are standing in a river in Egypt (in denile) mate. Windows 10 is the only thing available on retail Laptops and desktops. Corporate customers are asking for laptops with Win 7 on them and are unable to get them. The only courses of action remaining are;
1. Do nothing and keep working with what they have (about 80% do this). While cost effective Microsoft is prematurely making life difficult hoping to prod them into Windows 10.
2. Buy a new laptop and wipe W 10, install Linux and then Install OEM W7 in a VM.
3. Begin throwing money at determining if Windows 10 or an alternative can be deployed without borking their business activities. This is usually a result of the "making life difficult" activity mentioned in #1, and the more aggravated they are the more amiable they are to alternatives.
Option two is only being adopted by small companies at the moment, those with 200 or fewer employees and no need for special hardware like copy-protection dongles hanging off a USB port or heaven forbid, an RS232 or worse, parallel port. These businesses, while more nimble in the decision making process, are forward looking and don't want to be held hostage by their information systems.
Because of lack of driver support for W7 on new hardware the VM is usually the only viable option for installing it on a new retail PC.
While the tablet might be replacing personal laptops, it isn't making a dent in replacing corporate (again the kinds with many shareholders) laptops and/or desktops,... unless you're Microsoft, Apple, or Google. Tablets (large format ones) as a graphics terminal (RDP || VNC session) into a VM on a corporate server and smaller form factors for retail Point Of Sale and Warehouse work are being used; they are however restricted to the corporate work place and there usually isn't a BYOD policy in effect.
I don't care that Google been's tracking people for donkey's years. Just because Google does it is not justification for Microsoft to turn the Operating System that MILLIONS depend on (although they are fast discovering that the dependence is an illusion) into a spy network whose primary purpose is to sell their information to others who in turn can try to sell goods and services to them.
Someone wrote earlier that they think the management team at Microsoft won't turn things around because they seem to have made up their minds that this is the direction they are going. Yes, there's the iceberg, point the ship at it and by all means telegraph the engine room to proceed all ahead flank. I'll start getting people into the lifeboats.
"If you're not paying for a product you're not a customer, just another product."
I call bovine excrement on that, you ARE a customer because you bought Windows 7 and Microsoft is pushing/has pushed you into "upgrading" (their words on the dialogue boxes). Yes yes, you could have refused, but actually saying "No Thank You" was not an option. Rejection was only available by closing the dialogue box, which is not the same as saying "No thanks", but is more of a "Get Out Of My Face" (for now) response. If you bought a PC with Windows 10 installed already then you ARE a customer by proxy of the weak-willed hardware industry that is slowly slitting its own throat still thinking that Microsoft is the same gravy-train they hitched their wagon to waaaay back in 1990. It is not, and their inability to shuffle product is proof of it.
In addition, as mentioned earlier Microsoft themselves are promoting W10 as a upgrade;
"Upgrade now?" or "Upgrade later?"
and then there's the
"Your Windows Upgrade is ready"
If it truly is a DIFFERENT O/S then they should put it beside W7 and no tilting the playing field in favor of W10 by reducing support for W7 and drivers for new chipsets. If it truly is a different O/S then why move to it? Let the two "different" operating systems with the same name duke it out and see which one wins.
What he said. Lose the data harvesting (and actually do it, don't just say you've done it) and restore the W7 UI and there would be little if anything bad about Win 10. That however, is not going to happen. Why? Things like GWX and how it gets on a system are a good indication of Microsoft's mentality. Microsoft wants to pimp out the meta data that their installed base of users COULD generate. They want to get the data first, before Google and their like does, and they can only do that if they get it from the Operating Syste. They took the approach that the installed base of Windows users was locked. They were wrong.
Customers are not a resource to be exploited, they are to be treated well, hand-held, fawned over, and made to feel like royalty, and when GWX (Get Windows 10) tool started installing itself, nagging users, using their sometimes expensive bandwidth to download Windows 10 files, the true purpose of Windows 10 was found out. The customer was now a product. People didn't like it, and they are voting by staying pat or moving elsewhere.
It still gets in my way, prevents me from doing what I want to do, doesn't work the way I want to work, requires more searching than doing, and requires far too many mouse clicks for things that once upon a time needed only a couple. If it was something I liked and wanted to use the show-stopper is that it doesn't work in a VM, and pretty all of my "desktop" machines except one are now virtualized. Cinnamon is more my cup of tea but suffers the same problems in a VM as Gnome 3, i.e. it NEEDS accelerated hardware to work properly, and forget using it over an RDP connection to a VM.
I often thank [insert your deity here] for MATE, and thank the devs with actual money for forking Gnome 2.
Wayland is also one of those things that hurts how I use Linux. Add systemd to the "improvements" and thoughts of migrating to BSD start to become more and more frequent.
When you use direct debit be it via a proximity RFID chip in the card or physically inserting the card and using chip & PIN, you are not handing the merchant the credentials needed to draw against your accounts. What you are doing is giving the bank permission to send an identified merchant a specified amount of dosh for a specific purchase at a specific place and time. Yes your purchases and buying habits are being analysed and tracked, which (aside from being more than a little scary) is also used to help detect fraud against the bank, and to a lesser degree, you.
As pointed out by others, the bank refunds fraud victims when it is their system that has been compromised; "chip and PIN" was introduced to lessen the bank's liability and increase the onus on you. There are many people (especially millenials) who don't seem to understand this concept. They hand their bank card to a mate and give out their PIN without much thought to the fact that they are responsible. If the bank discovers that you compromised security the likely hood of getting compensated for a fraudulent transaction is reduced.
e-books are OK, and I have several of them, but the shelf on which my paper tomes rest has never denied me the ability to access to any of them.
"Keeps the shareholders and beancounters happy ... In the short term."
And therein lies much of the problem.
A recent laptop that came with Win 10 needed to run W7 Pro (not Win 8, 8.1 or 10) for a particular piece of vertical market software. They wiped out Win 10 and installed Win 7 Pro. OOPS! No W7 drivers available for the graphics or USB hardware. No problem. Blow away the new Win 7 install (it had not yet been activated) and install Mint 17.3 64 Bit, then spin up a VM and install Win 7 on it. TAH-DAH! No more problem.
The lesson? Not allowing/providing support of new hardware under W7 is a bad strategy that is having unintended consequences.
"At what point do they decide that porting the real cash cow - MS Office - to Linux makes sense?"
The way Libre Office is advancing, M$ had better not wait too long to port their cash cow to Linux. The cheese is rapidly being moved.
Password Manager Application.
One password will have to rule them all so make sure it's not something obvious like your name, your pets name, your address or your favorite sports team, etc. Don't use a cloud service, if they get cracked and/or accidentally release millions of stored accounts to the world+dog then you have to change everything.
What was that about Windows 10 and Microsoft ending support for Win 7-8 for the new CPU's? I wasn't paying attention... was installing Linux on two laptops; a new acer with Win 10 (Buh-Bye Windows 10), an IBM T-60 running Win 7 that got hit with Crypto Locker, and an elderly couples Compaq-Presario that was running Windows Vista once again has a spring in it's step. All three of them now run Mint 17.3 Cinnamon.
I trust them not. Cozy up to RH for better implementation of RH in Azure, develop tools for monitoring Linux servers (virtual or not-virtual (presumeably running under Azure)) and now announce that they are migrating MS SQL to Linux. Nope. I'm not drinking the kool-aid.
I'll stand by the rule of thumb that anything MS does they do for more to help themselves than the IT ecosystem as a whole. This leopard has not changed it's spots nor been de-fanged || de-clawed.
Rule #1: Don't do business with Microsoft.
Rule #2: See Rule #1
Although these words may not provide any actual comfort, I offer my sincerest condolences.
The death of a companion is, for the living, terrifyingly final; and while the grief is overwhelming, it can throw into stark clarity what is and is not important to us. Those who think "it's only a pet, not a person" have no empathy, the loss is felt no less keenly, the grief no less wrenching.
On the inanity of the marketing machine's message, I agree. The signal to noise ratio is terrible. Getting solid information pertinent to making decisions to resolve the problems at hand is increasingly difficult. There is much smoke, and very little fire with which to warm ourselves.
Clicking on a button to give permission and not understanding the details is a stupid thing to do, yes. Signing ANY legal document without understanding what you are getting yourself into is a stupid thing to do. Creating an EULA that people need to be run past a lawyer before agreeing to its terms is also a stupid thing to do.
Rule of thumb: If the wording of the EULA is overly complex then they are trying to screw you.
Microsoft is telling people that Windows 10 is going to be installed by asking them if they want it now or later.
If port security thought they were under reconnaissance by a potential hostile then the correct course of action would be to call the police and have them pop around to ask some questions. To their credit they eventually did this, but it was more as a tool for character assassination than public protection. The article makes the police out to be the more reasonable of the two parties, and I tend to think that this would have been a non-story had they been called into play at the outset.
The port authority does not appear to understand the rules under which they operate. As it is now they have egg on their face and need to apologize not only to the photographer, but to the populace at large for puffery of the rules as a defense for their actions. The employees need to apologize for their over-the-top behavior, seek training in the rules and perhaps (I thought I'd never write this bit) get some sensitivity training.
Pride goeth before a fall, and their pride/ego will be the biggest hurdle they face when setting things right. They must assure the citizenry that they are trustworthy when it comes to understanding and applying the rules under which they operate.