So now you know why...
...I always said that I didn't trust cloud technology like this. The problem is the single point of failure; Microsoft.
1785 posts • joined 2 Oct 2007
Totally agree, and on a lighter note, after recently having extended troubles with Quantum, I discovered Waterfox, a branch of Firefox that got out of there before Quantum swallowed up the whole ecosystem.
I do have one Linux machine running the latest Quantum as a reference point but everything else either runs pre-Quantum ESD or Waterfox. Sod Mozilla if this is their attitude right now - as bad as Microsnot.
The only question I'm asking is have these chip 'flaws' surpassed Y2K yet as the biggest non event in computing history?
As one of a large number of people who worked pretty hard to make sure that everything worked reasonably well come 01/01/2000, I think that I can guess why you might have a few downvotes on this post.
If it wasn't for the fact that my current Huawei, nearly 3 years old, still really performs well for me, I might have considered this. Suffice to say that buying a replacement Huawei is a no-no for me because of the EMUI (aka "I want my Android to look like any phone other than an Android") interface, the only downer here (yet again) is the sodding sealed battery!
What Windows 10 S achieves which is a more secure locked down environment would be better if it was a mode you could turn on once your PC was how you wanted it, a simple toggle switch.
Quite so, but let's face it, the only people in the marketplace are corporate types who don't want to lock down to Microsoft, they want to lock down to their own subset of applications. Other than that, users want to do what they want, not what some Merkan corporate wants to lock them into. The only good thing I can say is that at least Micro$oft were up front this time about it rather than sneaking it in like they did with the Slurp(tm) or like Google and much of their shady doings.
I think that Microsoft's management are getting a bit too game fixated. Turning W10Pro into DLC, microtransactions and such.
By logical extension, this means that people buying Surfaces with W10S on want a fully open system, not one gimped to the MS Shop, so the MS Shop is another failure? Are we equating the Shop with Zune-like failure here?
Do any come with a choice of systemd or not ?
Unfortunately, the various big distros either make it as tricky as possible or simply don't provide for it. It gets worse as some packages rely implicitly on systemd being there. The only distros that come to mind right now would something like Slackware, Devuan or Gentoo.
Poeterring's shitware just seems to get everywhere.
Another SuSE user here who is a little puzzled. I've been using SuSE since I switched from RedHat at the end of the 1990s and have used KDE on most of these. Don't believe I have ever seen this fault on any version of KDE. Even the time I flirted with TDE on Mint this didn't happen. I'm using KDE3 on openSUSE Leap 42.2 at this present moment and haven't noticed any messed up backgrounds or crashes. Not even on my ancient openSUSE 11.4 netbook.
You sound like you got very unlucky.
You mean that whole Plasma thing? It's one reason why, even to date, I still use KDE3 and substitute "plasmoids" for Screenlets. Like that lot over at GNOME, my thought was that KDE were concentrating a little too hard on self indulgence and not enough on what users were actually asking for and while KDE3 isn't perfect, KDE4 wasn't the answer IMHO. Plasma 5 isn't as bad but it still doesn't quite come up to the mark either.
Yet again, it seemed that certain types within the Linux community were trying to reinvent the wheel for no other reason than that they could. The only difference with KDE4 and GNOME3 was that they had a lock-in that Unity didn't have, though while the backlash against GNOME3 brought forth such projects as MATE and Cinnamon, I've come to conclude that Trinity isn't KDE3 in every respect and certainly doesn't have the push of the two GNOME offshoots.
If KDE are finally coming to their senses with Plasma 5 then all power to them, but I'll keep my KDE3 install going for as long as I need to until I'm happy with what they have done. Mind you, moving to Ubuntu of any stripe is unlikely for me...
Is one where everything you do is done with a Huawei branded device and you are driven in a Huawei robot vehicle to your Huawei branded house where you eat Huawei branded food and the Huawei braned security system feeds every movement and conversation you have back to central control.
And so what is so different? Simply substitute the word "Huawei" for "Google", "Microsoft" or "Apple" and it all makes the same amount of sense. These are all people that want your respect, your obedience, your loyalty... your money...
I wouldn't blame Huawei for trying to get in on the act that Amazon and others are trying. Trust them? Perhaps not. Blame them? Moneeeeey....
Question is: Why do they want to be Google?
Now there's an obvious answer! What do Google and Microsoft have in common?
1. They are large corporations based in Merka.
2. They have a stranglehold on one or more parts of a lucrative business.
3. They have a lust for money and power.
So if Google are making moolah from doing things and acting in a certain way, why would Microsoft do the same thing?
Let's try not to be evil...
that firefox is fucking unusable on Android.
It is? I've been using it for quite some time. Seems to work fine here. Which version of Android are you using and on which phone? Sounds like a localised problem rather than a general one.
I'm like a die hard Stallman like hippy, rooted phone, droid-wall, write software for it myself - and this is the only place I use Chrome (as such I don't use it for much) but firefox is fucking unusably slow. It's awful.
I've used Firefox on more than one phone, rooted and not. And yes, I mostly started using Firefox on my phone because it was possible to stop ads where other browsers didn't offer the same capability. OK, that was a long time ago, but it still works.
I've actually started to wonder if the PC situation is similar and looked for a degoogled version of Chrome.
Hmm. Now if you take the PC approach, I use all three major browsers and have even dabbled with Opera. There's not a lot of difference overall; you'll find slight differences in each that may persuade you to use one over another but that's about it right now. How this will change is another matter - I'm a little sceptical about the oncoming changes in Firefox 57, for example.
It's inexplicably crap. Surely they know about this? But it's been crap since 2012.
That sounds like you haven't tried it since then. Not every version of Firefox has been good, just as not every version of any browser has been good, but I'm using a version right now that works pretty well so I'd be a little cautious about flinging crap about like that. It makes you sound like a Google shill.
Instead, BECAUSE of his attitude, the kernel maintainers are reinventing the wheel without bothering to look at his code in case it somehow taints them and causes trouble.
Seems to be a common problem. Actually surprised nobody has drawn the similarities between this and a certain other bit of coding bollocks which only seems to be perpetuated because everyone has their collective snouts planted between RedHat's cheeks.
Windows 7 machines most affected after so-called "experts" advised switching off updates to avoid Windows 10 upgrade notifications?
See my earlier comment. If Microsoft hadn't tried so hard to insert spyware into some of their patches for W7 then people would have not even suggested switching off updates. Well, some might have done but nobody would have listened to them.
Having said that, pointing fingers at users for not patching doesn't really escape the fact that the hole was there, it was exploited by the NSA, it was then stolen and somebody else used that same exploit to try to extract money. How many more holes are there in Windows, current version included, that the NSA knows about and keeps under wraps, even from Microsoft?
Or MacOS? Or Linux? I know where I'm pointing and it isn't at any specific end users.
So the question is - why have you got several thousand W7 desktops unpatched?
I can think of a couple of reasons. The first isn't that unusual; as many have noticed, even Microsoft, there are always those that plead incapable when it comes to computers. The question here is whether such users should be allowed access; consider that these people can cause all sorts of problems for other users by not being up to the task of handling their system responsibly.
The other is a little more sinister. Since just before the release of Windows 10 there have been increasing amounts of concern about Microsoft's patching habits. The biggest concern has been that Microsoft have spent a lot of time and effort trying to integrate spyware into their products (see the Register article "Mud sticks: Microsoft, Windows 10 and reputational damage") to the extent that some people have stopped patching. While originally it was easy to spot the spyware patches and avoid them, the current regime of rollups makes this all but impossible to do.
So if finger pointing is really necessary, and before we charge headlong into a fit of blaming unpatched users or the people that perpetrated this problem, let us also consider Microsoft's role in this.
"Windows has a customer commitment to investigate reported security issues, and proactively update impacted devices as soon as possible."
Of course. And don't call me... (Bloody Kentucky Fried Theatre!)
"We recommend customers use Windows 10 and the Microsoft Edge browser for the best protection."
We also recommend that we never miss an opportunity to plug our latest shitware.
Some years ago now I said that tablets were a fad.
I owned two of them. OK, they were cheap beasts; the first one died after a year of use which didn't impress me at all given that it didn't have much use to its name and I stopped using the second after I realised that the firmware had a bug in it which made it insecure.
The trouble was that I never really found a good use for them. Apart from those two, I had an iPad briefly at one job I had but again it often sat in my drawer doing nothing. That isn't to say that they didn't have their uses but it does show that I never really had a use for them. In fact the last use I had for a tablet was swiftly supplanted when I realised that my smartphone could do the same job with a lot more portability.
The idea that tablets would replace laptops soon came to an end with such things as ultrabooks and so forth in that people still wanted a decent keyboard rather than faffing about with a touchscreen when typing. It's the reason why Windows 8 was a flawed concept and it's the reason now why tablets are on the decline, and that's before we consider the market saturation.
Tablets were a fad just as smartwatches and netbooks were fads. There may have been good intentions behind them but a fad is a fad and all fads must end.
the answer from the lead systemd developer (Poettering) is that - it isn't our problem.
And that's one of the biggest reasons why Poettering is mistrusted here. He acts like his word is law, as though he was the second coming of Linus. Systemd is not a replacement for init in his eyes, he wants it to eventually become a replacement for Linux in general, and not only does he have the trust of Redhat, but all the major distros are following him too. I killed off openSUSE on my latest box because it relies too heavily of systemd and Poettering's shite but though I've moved to Mint, I can see the creep going on there too. At least one of the mainstream distros needs to put him in his place but none of them have the balls to do it. If it takes something like Devuan, then more power to them!
'The beauty in GPL software is that if you don't like it, you can just grab the code and fix it yourself.'
Quite so, but generally speaking a user would prefer not to have to fix bugs introduced by twats like Poettering. Fixing accidental bugs, incompatibilities and adding functionality is one thing but having to repair the damage done because somebody working high up wants to dictate how your system should work and doesn't give a flying f*** about complexity, compatibility or usability is something I'd rather not have to do.
Especially when the other big names in Linux have their collective hooters stuffed firmly up Poettering's taskmaster's rear end and will not see reason.
It's not a "Registry for Linux" as many articles/posts have claimed,
It's something a lot more sinister than a "registry". Something like a registry could be added if one were really needed without everything that systemd is bringing into being.
it streamlines bringing up a Linux box and does away with a confusing script-based system
There was nothing confusing about it. When comparing the various sysvinit machines with my current crop of systemd systems, the way in which systemd is gobbling up various modules and making them difficult, sometimes impossible, to access is, if anything, overcomplicating what was previously trivial to work on.
that was years out of date and difficult to optimise/parallelise.
The age of the system is immaterial if it works. As for optimisation, sysvinit was pretty good where that was concerned and "parallelisation" is merely yet another fad which has little real use.
Having said that, the most recent Devuan beta felt like a bit of a let down when I tried it; even the first beta worked better for me. I'll give it a go with a view to possible future use but it all depends on how well it is set up and, more importantly, how well updating works.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018