Oh Jony Ive...
"Bad design" is what you inflicted upon iOS7/8, and now on OSX with Yosemite. What passes for the OSX GUI in Yosemite looks like someone passed a steamroller over Aqua. Bad Jony!
3111 posts • joined 12 Oct 2007
"Bad design" is what you inflicted upon iOS7/8, and now on OSX with Yosemite. What passes for the OSX GUI in Yosemite looks like someone passed a steamroller over Aqua. Bad Jony!
2FA as implemented by most banks is actually secure, which involves a physical token (RSA's SecureID, but there are others) which you will know if it is stolen or not. You really have to have the token in your hand at the moment you're doing a transaction, so physically having them will assure you nobody can do stuff with your account. It also assures you that you can do stuff anywhere you are, as the only thing needed is that token and nothing more.
But I've seen that 2FA is increasingly being used to refer to something lazy. It is being referred to "we send your OTP via SMS", which adds stupidity to the formula. Instead of an actual token, it requires you to have 1) a cellphone number, 2) with coverage, 3) switched on during said transaction. Number 2 is an issue if you're travelling outside your country, but it can also be an issue in areas where you might have internet connectivity of some sorts, but no cell coverage. Why complicate stuff? There are even Virtual Token solutions (VASCO has one) where you can set up tokens on a smartphone if you don't want to spend that much on physical tokens. Hell, Blizzard has something like that for their Battle.net service!!!!
I'm not sure where you are banking. I have multiple US and UK bank accounts and precisely NONE of them have the security of my paypal, apple, or Microsoft accounts (i.e. dual factor).
See, sometimes forcible regulation brings good things. All Mexican banks offer 2FA, because they are mandated by law to do so. Pretty much every bank implemented some form of 2FA since 2007, and the last one that still used the corny "card number matrix" switched to physical real tokens sometime around 2011.
Meanwhile in the US, 2FA is nowhere to be found.
No way am I ever going to carry a financial instrument that uses part of my body as a key.
OH SO VERY AGREED. Anyone who has watched either The 6th Day or Demolition Man already knows exactly why biometrics for security are a very bad idea. Sure, high-end biometric scanners will usually check if the body part is still attached to its rightful owner, but the common criminals won't necessarily know this before hacking off your finger or plucking out your eye. And they might still do it out of spite anyway.
Stop this biometric madness. If you want better security, go down either 2FA, PKI, or some combination of these. Biometrics are going to be painful.
New York? That's an old city. Across the water, the same can be said of London.
Except London seems to be doing a better job in getting their bandwidth upgraded compared to NYC.
Indeed. Most migrations away from BB were basically "the CEO has an iToy and now wants everyone to use iToys!". Sad, as BB is the only one that is actually secure by default.
OR ... hold out for Windows 10.
OR ... install a pirated version of Windows 7 and go down the "get legal" routes that MS offers to actually buy a Win7 license. It is probably still open, especially if you install a "pirated" Win7 Pro license, as Win7 Pro is still on sale.
Buying a Windows 8.x license is agreeing that TIFKAM is "awesome". Don't do it.
I happened to be founding my new company right around the time that MS decided to screw us all with Windows 8. I couldn't find a Windows 7 laptop at all. That was just the final push needed to switch back to Mac (I switched to Windows sometime around MacOS 8 due to High School increasingly turning to Windows).
I've already bought into the OSX ecosystem and some of the apps aren't available on Windows, so there's no way Windows 10 will pull me back. I might eventually buy a license for my virtual machines, but it's going to be increasingly hard for me to justify upgrading a Windows VM that works OK, and MS's insistence in having a local OS account tied to "the cloud" is going to be even less appealing to me.
Enterprise actually wants Windows 8 quite a lot. But as usually costs of transition slow things down.
None of our clients are touching Windows 8 at all. They don't want it, they don't like it, and now that Windows 10 has been announced that fixes up the UI, there's no way they're moving upwards from 7 until that comes out.
Oh, another of our clients also decided to stop adding up Windows Server instances when MS released Server 2012, the one that inherited the stupid blocky UI as well.
Agreed, Windows 8.1's default isn't. But it only takes a few clicks on taskbar settings to get the UI back more-or-less to Windows 7, no third-party software required.
But it still saddles you with the awful "Start Screen", which is one of the main complaints with Windows 8.x. That requires buying Start8, which will actually fix your problem but I'd rather punish MS by not buying Windows 8.x at all unless they fix their UI mess.
But that ain't going to happen, the real fix has been pushed to Win10 and the only reason I can think for them doing that is because it'll make people run to upgrade up to Windows 10.
MS killing Win7 basically guarantees that everyone will get saddled with the ugly OS and theoretically will need to upgrade to Win10. In reality, it'll just keep punishing OEMs which will have their Win8-hobbled PCs and laptops gathering dust along with the heaps of unsold Xbox 180's...
They have announced increased profit and revenue though. Unlike Sony that have announced a predicted 2 billion loss for the year! I wouldn't risk buying a PS4 personally - it's likely to end up as an oversize doorstop when Sony go bust...
Microsoft has announced a profit. The Xbox division isn't doing so well, which is why MS has been repeatedly told that they should either spin off or kill that part of MS before it brings down the rest of the company. Given that they also took a hit with their ghastly Windows 8 fiasco, they probably should heed the investors' advice.
On Sony's side, the PS division is probably the one that has been keeping them afloat; if Sony does go down, the PS division might get spun off on its own. Hell, Sony itself might survive a bankruptcy scenario, see how Daewoo has found life as "LG".
Ah, it was just a matter of time before an MS shill posted a non-topical comment peddling the Xbox 180. And as usual, it's a an AC. Not sure if that's better than the usual shills...
I don't know how they're managing PS4 updates, but I remember that most PS3 firmware updates were mandatory, especially after 3.21 when they axed OtherOS. They seem to have stopped after 4.55, which IIRC was released around the time the PS4 was released. It's probably because Sony is now more worried about the PS4.
If the 2.00 update is mandatory, then they're going to have to release a fix really soon. Yipes!
So the CEO for a pretty tight tech company, increasingly being known to do whatever it can to make their products non-user-serviceable (retina MBP, most of the iThingys, the iMacs) has an openly gay CEO.
On the other side, we have a mostly FLOSS company that had for a brief period an openly anti-gay CEO. Is this some kind of business-class irony joke?
Net Neutrality basically means that whatever bandwidth you pay is the bandwidth you get. Content is irrelevant, and that is how things should stay.
Content providers can and should set up links with IX facilities, and optionally they might set up some kind of content cache within some ISP's networks. Yes, if they set up the latter they should at least pay the ISP for the link on their side. But that isn't the issue with Net Neutrality.
Yes you pay your ISP for a connection, but usually the T&C forbid public hosting on a domestic connection.
And this should be made illegal with six or seven-figure fines per violation for ISPs to put these T&Cs. Internet connectivity is both ways, not a "grab stuff from outside" thing only. This is also why CGNAT should be explicitly made illegal as well.
Forbidding end users from hosting stuff or having a public IP is the equivalent of having a landline phone service that can't receive calls. Sure you can call, but it's pretty much useless as nobody can call you.
Interestingly, usage of NAT is one of the main reasons we have this "asymmetrical" data flow problem in the first place! Older IM programs and apps would directly peer between end-users, with the "central server" being used only for IP discovery; see how ICQ used to work in the early days. These days, thanks to NAT everyone has to go through a central server because NAT breaks connectivity everywhere and you can't be sure about anything on the other side anymore.
I also did the phased change, but I had the benefit of having all my apartment to myself. When I moved in, everything was 100w incandescent, so what I did was that I let them burn out, then I started replacing the burnt out bulbs with the remaining ones in the apartment that were in areas I rarely used. Only 'till I was down to 3 bulbs did I go and mass-purchase CFLs to substitute all of my bulbs. Then I just left the 100w ones in the rarely used areas, those were substituted as soon as they burned out which did take a while. My whole apartment went full CFL sometime around 2007.
LEDs are still too expensive for my taste, so the few CFLs that have burned out have still been replaced by CFLs. I guess it'll be about 3 years before LED bulbs drop down to the affordable range.
Found someone offering genuine New sealed Old Stock. Counterfeit of course, blocked volume license key.
There's an interesting trick around MS not selling Win7 licenses, and you were already halfway there. Install Win7, get the "Windows product not original" message. You will be sent to a site offering to buy a legal license for your OS ... and yes, they will sell you Win7 Pro or Win7 Ultimate, whatever you did install on your PC. I was able to get XP this way long after MS did the same thing with Vista, and I'm pretty sure that Win7 licenses are probably still available through this channel. WGA is probably more concerned with legalizing pirated Windows versions than trying to push the unloved Win8; at this point, users will rather deal with pirated Win7 than get reamed with Win8. MS is better off getting revenue from Win7 rather than no income from pirated Win7.
Normal consumers who unwittingly use counterfeit notes, or who purchase a cloned car, will (upon detection of the counterfeit) have those taken away from them never to be seen again.
Selling counterfeit goods is illegal.
Buying counterfeit goods isn't.
Counterfeit banknotes are actually illegal for very specific reasons, mostly that banknotes are actual legal tender, and if counterfeit banknotes weren't illegal, all banknotes would be worthless as anyone would just simply print their own and pay with them.
Who ever made the counterfeit chips is STEALING from FDTI.
That word doesn't mean what you think it means. They are infringing upon patented stuff, or building a trademarked/copyrighted design and having it interface with software they haven't paid a license for, but they aren't stealing anything. There's a reason why copyright infringement, patent infringement, trademark infringement and theft are separate things in pretty much any country's law.
Counterfeit cash or cards: subject to confiscation upon detection, further use is not permitted
Cloned car: subject to confiscation upon detection, further use is not permitted
Counterfeit USB to serial gizmo: ...
Counterfeit Rolex watch: You get to keep it.
Counterfeit bags: You get to keep it.
Pretty much counterfeit product confiscation is made at country customs, and even then end-users/consumers are pretty much given a pass on that. Why? Because there's a good chance you didn't even know they were counterfeit goods!
The hideous ACTA was trying to criminalize this, but that got shot down thanks to the retarded SOPA/PIPA law in the US that made the world notice ACTA. Sure, they'll try to do TPP, but I'm pretty sure it'll also get shot down.
In fact, there's a good chance that this bricking might have been actually legalized by ACTA. Yet another reason to kill that thing for good.
Maybe you are right, but chip counterfeiting has reached epidemic levels. If the board manufacturers that buy the chips don't care of they are getting cheap counterfeits or not (because they knowlingly buy from non-authorized suppliers) then it's up to the chip manufacturers to put a stop to it.
Understandable, but bricking counterfeit chips is a bad move in the long run. It would be far easier for FTDI to have the drivers flag a chip as counterfeit, then give this information to the end-user, which will then go to the manufacturer and say "hey, this is counterfeit stuff!" and so the complaint goes all the way up through the supply chain.
Instead, this will only get anger directed at FTDI and/or Microsoft. Manufacturers will probably avoid FTDI altogether instead of risking their hardware getting bricked because one of their suppliers slipped a mickey on their chips.
How much of that profit is saved wages from the layoffs?
None. The layoffs were done by Microsoft post-NokiaPhone acquisition. Maybe those laid off are going to jump to Jolla. Also noteworthy: a Nokia fund jumpstarted Jolla; so not only Nokia isn't bad on former employees, they actually help them to start up new businesses after they leave.
Indeed. I'm running and old-style BBS on a VPS that's costing me less than my monthly internet bill. No more hiding them in college or work servers. And IRC is still out there!
If they are doing it properly, it should be asking for token auth every time you log on, or at least on first logon after power-on and after waking up from sleep. Which would make it impractical for most regular users that aren't used to this.
2FA makes a lot of sense for sensitive stuff, or online services where money is moving, such like e-banking. It doesn't make sense for laptop access, unless you're carrying sensitive data in which case you would already have some extra measures in place anyway.
What's the purpose for 2FA on Windows? I fail to see the usefulness for local logins with 2FA. And I'm saying this as someone who is perfectly OK with 2FA on banking sites (I carry at least 4 physical tokens with me).
2-Factor auth... Good!
... Tied to a smartphone ... Not!
... Using an actual token (in the smartphone) ... OK, as long as it works like the Battle.net one
... Not supported in BlackBerry ... BAD. Come on, every other virtual token solution supports it, if they can be arsed into supporting it, so can you! Or maybe MS is still butthurt that BB still has more market share than their failing mobile OS?
Not to mention that a large part of the US Gov, including the DoD only allow BBs on their network...
I was kind of expecting Congress to pass something like that, or bring up "Clipper: The Sequel". But then they're having a big election next month and nobody wants to be the idiot who killed liberty in "the Land of the Free".
At least Senator Darrell Issa is consistent; he opposed both the hideous SOPA/PIPA thing and the equally horrible ACTA. Nice to see a congresscritter on the real citizen's side for once.
Apple (and every other manufacturer) can already carrier lock a phone.
But carriers are the ones that actually carrier lock phones, not manufacturers. You're also seeing the problem backwards: the real issue is that you can't swap out your SIM and use a different device if you want/need to. And a soft SIM will be locked permanently as well, so it's just going back to the dark ages of CDMA which I won't ever go back. The SIM card is an issue of consumer freedom and should not be allowed to be turned into yet another lockdown method.
As it is, phones can be SIM unlocked in most civilized countries for free, for a fee, or by some h4xx0r dude.
Indeed. For us, this was still true even way into the 2000's, as GSM was introduced somewhere around 2002 or 2003. This is also why I refuse to do business with any carrier that still uses the awful SIM-less CDMA.
I've always seen the use of a physical SIM card as giving the user total liberty in choosing both which handset you want to use, and which carrier you'll get. Over here in Mexico, Virgin Mobile has entered the market as an MVNO and the smartphones they're pushing over have dual-SIM capability. Which means you gain the ability to keep your older SIM and phone number while beta testing the new mobile operator. It's also very useful for those who wish to have a backup line in case your main carrier goes down.
Software SIM would be a giant step backwards in consumer liberties. It's VERY BAD and telecom regulators everywhere should make this outright illegal for anything that isn't legacy (CDMA, AMPS, the legacy SIMless stuff obviously doesn't support SIM cards).
Do I sound old? I'm 35! I guess that is old to script-kiddies(Java).
If you're going to bash programming languages, you've got a far better target with Visual Basic.
MS isn't the first one with 'Easter Eggs' in their software; that practice goes all the way back to at least Atari. Maybe even earlier. Please don't be a dickhead.
But the numbers, and the contra revenue , says that Intel are pretty much giving their SoCs away at zero cost (leading to losses of $1B or so per quarter). And yet the volume builders, especially those without significant other Wintel dependencies,are still just not interested in x86?
Looks pretty good. It's about time Intel lost its empire over all computer-ish chips. At least it'll balance the force, as it tipped towards Intel with the awful decision of having the next-gen gaming consoles saddled with Craptel x86.
Elop made a strategic decision which would have worked if his business partner hadn't been so clueless about the merits of its own product.
This is where the Elop defense collapses. Most people in the IT world that weren't tied to the MS ecosystem knew this could and would fail, including the reasons why it ultimately failed. There was also a lot of evidence pointing to the fact that buying into the MS mobile solutions leads to market loss and bankruptcy: the latest example would be Palm, and HTC almost got killed though it seems to have survived in a sense ... thanks to Android.
Betting on a new revolutionary OS is a good bet... as long as it isn't MS behind that "revolutionary OS" as they usually gravitate around Windows and they can't think away from that. We all know that Windows on the phone is useless. Even licensing BB10 would've been a better bet for Nokia!
IIS is irrelevant - "Other" is more popular, and even Google was at one point.
I'd also note that Java Application Servers might also have a better market share than IIS. Of all the banks in my country, only two use IIS. The rest are running some kind of app server, usually IBM's WebSphere.
So it seems they can't even get the serious financial market.
Even if we take out that the 37% figure from previous months was artificially pumped up by Chinese linkfarms, 37% is nowhere near "overtaking all FOSS web servers". Yet it is stated a lot by "AC"s who seem to be pushing up MS as the best solution. Try harder, astroturfing/shilling is easily noticed over here.
There is hardly any mention of it from Microsoft ever - it only seem to be Microsoft shills that are getting their knickers in a twist that Microsoft are doing so badly in this space...
But not for the last few months - IIS was previously ahead with the highest market share of sites of any web platform.
Not if you added up Apache + nginx sites. Even with the July 2014 stats, they made up 37.53%, which means that more than 60% of all web servers were running something other than IIS. And even then, most of those servers were actually Chinese linkfarms anyway. If you're going to shill MS, do it with better datasets.
Microsoft repeatedly defended the Win8 UI on the grounds that their "telemetry" contradicted the nay-sayers.
Their telemetry was severely broken then. Because pretty much all beta testers were complaining about Metro and were doing the registry hack thing to disable the hideous Start Screen until one of the releases outright removed that ability and rammed Metro up all the beta testers asses. That might have given MS the "wanted" telemetry, as nobody could do otherwise.
Everyone has always been looking for those backdoors. Remember NSA_KEY? The hacker community has been very suspicious since the early 2000s. We probably only need better SSL/TLS protocols or just use them for everything, as it seems that is spooking more the spooks.
BlackBerry Enterprise Service (BES) has been pretty much broken despite the encryption too.
Nope, BES isn't broken at all. In fact, that was one of the main reasons why BlackBerry (formerly RIM) ran into trouble with the Indian government, as they wanted access to both BIS and BES.
Now that BB10 devices are no longer tied to BIS, it's possible that they are now harder to tap than the old devices. Also notice that the NSA was able to h4xx0r Merkel's Nokia handset ... but they weren't able to do the same to her BB Z10. Quite interesting...
Setting up a recursive search BIND is easy peasy. If you are really concerned, configure iptables (or ipfw) on the box to only allow incoming queries from ISP-controlled networks and/or configure BIND to only serve their networks.
Anyone relying on 126.96.36.199 who isn't a mortal user is being extremely lazy!
Stuff like the depth of a UI is a personal preference, not something for which there is one obvious "right" answer.
Which is why you should give users the choice of one or the other. I'm miffed that Yosemite is going to foist the "retro" flat Dock on us, and AFAIK there's no way to choose the 3D look.
Ah, so the best way to address that is be insulting, instead of finding a way forward that works for all. That validates what the guy says.
Nope, it's actually the other way around. He was originally told "hey dude, we have the UNIX philosophy stuff, maybe you should read this" and he dismissed it as utter crap. That is, he's coding stuff for a thing he absolutely hates. This is akin to Stallman doing code for Windows. Would you really expect Stallman to play nice with MS developers, especially given his hostility to propietary code?
Yes, I know about the Linux prima donna effect. In fact, the way someone refers to Linux itself will raise red flags (or yellow flags) on his attitude. Does he/she insist on saying "GNU/Linux"? There's a good chance you've got one of the hostile dudes. But in Lennart's case, it seems he's a prima donna himself!
Icon for those who need to re-read "1984", then look at China, and think twice about giving the government the power to neuter the internet.
Regulation of Internet packet prority treatment isn't the same as regulating internet content. The FCC can simply declare internet providers as "common carriers" and that would bring internet regulation in line with telephone operators. The government hasn't been censoring phone lines, has it?
If you're really, really concerned about "internet censorship", you should not only be for Net Neutrality, you should be asking for laws to make CGNAT illegal as it allows ISPs to block incoming internet traffic if they want to do so. (in a phone analogy: it would be like you paying for a phone that can only make calls, but can't receive any calls at all.)
And can we cut the crap with this Net 'Neutrality' misdirection? It has nothing to do with 'neutrality', it's just a word the anti-capitalists have seized on because Net 'socialism' wouldn't go down so well with the American public.
Net Neutrality has nothing to do with socialism. It has everything to do with double-dipping; telcos are already charging you for bandwidth, and they want to charge an extra 'extortion rate' on content providers to prioritize their traffic lest they get stuck in the slow lane. The problem is that the content provider is already paying for bandwidth on his end.
There's a good chance that a non-Net Neut internet will still see U.S. telco's not investing on infrastructure, instead sitting their asses while they rake in the big bucks they get from double-dipping subscribers and content providers alike.
Obama is getting a clear message from the American public. He should ask for Wheeler's resignation. NOW.
And in other news, a new report by Poitras and Peter Maass reveals that the NSA uses undercover operatives to subvert foreign companies and telecommunications networks, having done so in China, Germany, and South Korea.
And Finland. So that's what Elop was really doing! Subverting a foreign company!
Um, what exactly did he do to benefit MS?
MS wanted to Borg a phone manufacturer to raise their WP installed base, as most of their usual OEMs were flocking to Android. Nokia had one of the largest shares in the smartphone market, and somehow MS thought all those Nokia users would keep buying Nokia even if the OS was switched to Windows Phone. Instead, it was "Palm: The Sequel" as everyone just flocked to Android or iOS.
He did what the mothership ordered him to do, now if that was good for MS is an entirely different matter.
Flames because of burning platforms, get it?
I had high hopes for Nokia after playing with an N900. Not just on the OS, anyone remember the transflective display it had? It was probably the only phone you could read in daylight, and the transflective feature meant more battery life. Maybe we'll see a spiritual successor from Jolla?
From some perspective, Microsoft understood better what a smartphone is than Apple and Google.
I don't think so. In fact, they still don't understand it. MS idea is "Windows everywhere" and that's why they fail everywhere else.
...and just not be a Fisher Price interface with a lot of colorful candies to collect for the joy of the average fanboy luser
You are right on Fisher Price interfaces being bad. But MS did exactly that with WP7, and then hobbled their own desktop OS with it in Windows 8!
If anyone had a good idea on how to do a real smartphone UI, it was Symbian-era Nokia. In fact, most of the pre-iPhone smartphone UIs were pretty much good on giving useful information to their users.
While I agree with your assessment, who on the board would realistically have pulled that trigger? Firing a brand new CEO with clearly no planned replacement strategy would have only doubled down on the share nosedive, and then the firer has then just committed the same offence as the firee.
I'll say a name here, and you'll know what I'm talking about.
While HP might not be swimming in the McDuck Moneybin's worth of $$$, the decision to axe Leo after his stupid gaffé is probably the reason we still have an HP vs. having it go down the acquisition route which befell good old companies like DEC, Tandem, or Sun Microsystems. See the difference:
- Elop sends the Burning Platforms memo and kills pretty much Nokia's value overnight. Board keeps him. Nokia Mobile is no more, now Borged by Microsoft and the way things are going, that's where it will die.
- Leo sends the Burning PCs memo, causing an instant 25% drop in HP shares. The board axes him about 1 month after this stupid, stupid move and backtracks on it. HP is still alive.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017