Re: US has addressed the problem...
"Probably not. But some people sleep better at night, because they did all they could."
Some people sleep better at night because their mattress is cushioned by millions of dollar bills.
4545 posts • joined 26 Jul 2008
"Probably not. But some people sleep better at night, because they did all they could."
Some people sleep better at night because their mattress is cushioned by millions of dollar bills.
Addressed the problem how, exactly? I can realize in advance that someone might shoot me, but I can't just decide to be immune to bullets.
"than the pub for men, or shopping trips for women"
I don't think it is a freedom of speech issue. I think it's a harrasment issue. The two don't have to go together. If there were a website rating guys and you're name appeared at the top saying: "dick like a worn out pencil - you'd have to be desperate"... Would that negatively impact your life? There will of course be people here who post: "No, because (insert reason)", but they don't speak for everyone. Particularly think how you would feel if you were a thirteen year old boy being mocked by the world.
It's not about freedom of speech, but it's still malicious and harmful.
...but it's better. Free Sofware (not quite identical to Open Source, incidentally), has positive beneficial effects even if we don't quite reach utopia. For one, it allows an escape route. Witness MySQL - when there were irreconcilable differences, developers forked it. Like a Hydra with a head cut off, two rise in its place. Fragmentation can be bad, but as an alternative to a company buying something out to kill it, for example, or a tyranical lead developer countenencing no breaking away from their vision, it is a positive result.
Secondly, whilst a company can take GPL'd code in house and keep their refinements to themselves, if they want to sell or work with others, they have to give back. (Yes, you can tip-toe around the edges with binary blobs and other fudging, but often this isn't feasible). So the GPL forces the production of a kind of coding Commons. Which is a good thing.
Thirdly, it reduces the barrier to entry. If you have to write a web-server from scratch to underly your product, or you have to licence one from a company that would be your natural rival, then as a small player you may just give up and go home. But if you could, say, just create it as an Apache module, maybe you can get into the market. And competition is good.
Yes, sometimes GPL has a downside for the self-interested. Maybe that Apache module has to be Open Source and others would try selling support for the module in competition with you (though you would have the edge). But it's optional - you can choose to participate in the Commons reaping the benefits as well as paying the costs, or you can go your own way and do everything from scratch. Point is, without GPL, there is only the latter and lack of choice is bad.
Finally, it lowers the barrier to entry for all those individuals which are the future of programming. They can grab Python or PHP or the GCC compiler, and get stuck in. Can you imagine a world where all programming language implementations were proprietary? It wouldn't be a complete disaster because companies would compete with each other with free versions because they wanted people to learn theirs, but it would certainly be worse than it is.
Could the Free Software world be better and are there abuses? Yes. Is it still a great positive force in the world of IT? Yes. I got into Open Source over a decade ago and I am not disillusioned yet.
I prefer to assume that the person I am talking with is a reasonable and intelligent person.
".......don't call us, we'll call you."
On a WP8 device.
(or would that just be mean) ;)
I have the Lumia 710. I don't feel particularly bothered by the lack of upgrade. I bought my device SIM-free for £160 and it will still do all the same things after Win8 is released as it does now. The loudest people on how unfair it is not to have an upgrade on these forums have typically been those who are anti-MS in the first place.
I don't need anyone to be angry on my behalf, thanks. I grew up in a time when phones weren't upgradeable and I don't see it as some human right that after having bought it, someone should come along for free and magically grant it the hardware it needs to run a newer OS that was released long after it was designed. I get security updates, etc. Sure, it's nice with other phones if you can install a future OS on it (and that this doesn't cause your legacy hardware to run like a dog, which often seems to be the case), but I knew what I was buying and I still like it.
Other companies than Nokia are producing Windows Phone 8 devices. There's probably going to be quite a range of hardware to choose from.
Why would you celebrate the end of a company (which you've hardly shown will happen)? Competition is good. If you (I am presuming) have an iPhone or Android device, then the better Windows Phone devices are the happier you should be as it provides stimulus for the companies that make your device to keep pushing forward.
Left and Right are not particularly useful definitions since the US two party-system has polarized all sorts of thing as belonging to Left or Right on an entierly arbitrary basis. Anti-abortion apparently that's lumped in with believing in low taxes for some reason? Compulsory medical insurance? Left wing thing apparently (despite forcing people to pay for private health care via insurance seeming pretty non-socialist to me). They just become two camps that grow increasingly logically inconsistent.
But what's really interesting with "Left" and "Right" is how little they match up to many people's perceptions. Biggest political donations in the Obama vs. John McCain presidential fight? Goldman Sachs donated 75% to Obama and 25% of their donations to McCain. Microsoft donated 70% of their contributions to the Democrats. Time-Warner: another big Dem. backer. Ask most Left wing people and they'll insist that the Right is the corrupt big business end of the scale, better funded, and that the Left are the underdogs. But Obama got and spent around double what his rival did in the presidential campaign. I'm not ranting about the Left here, political contributions need reigning in massively all around. But the image most people have of the "Left" is seriously at odds with the reality.
I even saw someone on these forums rant about fascists as a right-wing idealogy. Uh, Mussolini - pretty much responsible for the modern term, was a socialist. The NAZIs were the National Socialism party and when they gained power, economically turned into a kind of state managed industrialism (hardly capitalist). But somehow some people want to cast these things as tendencies of "The Right".
The Tea Party - considered very Right-wing - were pretty much all against foreign wars whilst the Democrats were voting to fund them. Reality vs. Popular Depiction clashing once again.
They're not useful terms. They were back in the days of Pitt the Younger, but modern American politics has turned them as much into camps of allegiance, as based on consistent ideology. And hypocrisy is rampant.
Running an x86 OS on an ARM platform...?
The computer says 'No.'
"you can always buy a Wacom tablet that also supports multitouch gestures"
Can you recommend one? I might be interested in this. I normally spend most of my time on the keyboard (shortcuts for everything), but it's good to try new things.
"Is there any way you know of making it not take-over the entire screen with new metro[whatever...] app? ie if I wanted to look at a webpage and my email in the same screen?"
Not with the Metro apps other than the 2/3rds and 1/3rd snapping of Metro apps.That would let you,e.g. look at a webpage whilst you had your email in a sidebar. It's okay for some things, like I've had the Financial app on 1/3rd of the screen (the left-most monitor) and had Desktop (which is technically a Metro app in its way) filling up the remaining 2/3rds of the left monitor and all of the right. That way the Metro app functions as a kind of live side bar showing emails, Social Networking feeds or whatever you want whilst not actually taking over the whole screen. It's handy sometimes, but not a fits-all solution. Normally, when I want to multi-task, I just use the Desktop programs and not Metro-apps which I see as more useful for tablets and RT users than if I'm using a Desktop with two monitors. After all, if I have Thunderbird or Outlook running on the Desktop, there's no big reason to use the Metro mail app. (Though as a side-bar, it does the job of letting me work whilst just ticking along on the edge of my vision).
"Or what about having settings open in one monitor and trying to open a webpage/email/whatever in the other monitor - does the dev release still hide the settings screen just to open the other?"
If I'm reading you right, then Settings (as in the side-bar) will close when you start doing something else, but the reverse isn't true. So if you were copying VPN settings from an email or something, that wouldn't be hidden just because you brought up the settings in a side-bar. Not sure if I got your meaning, but that might answer the question. You can still use Control Panel in its own window on Desktop if you want also.
"Oh yeah - and having internet explorer open differently to the metro internet explorer - is just plain weird!?"
Yeah - that's fucked up. I actually prefer the Metro version normally because you get more screen estate. But I switch back to the Desktop one when I want to work with my bookmarks, copy from Browser to emails, etc. That needs work.
"Some stuff seems hardwired into the system. Well, that is; maybe you can configure it but I haven't found that yet. So; insert an audio CD and the Metro cd player will pop up."
Right click on the file, pick "Open With-> Choose default program."
Low values of 'hardwired,' then? ;)
They remove all the disturbing new stuff and let you sit there pretending everything is as it always was.But you'll feel pretty silly when all those around you are able to manage Win8 perfectly well without additional tools.
"But the Start menu is better," you'll say.
"Why?" will come the reply straight back.
"Well, hierarchical menu lets me access more programs than I can fit on the Start Screen"
"I can comfortably fit twenty programs on the main screen on my laptop. Fifty on my Desktop monitory! How many programs do you regularly use, gramps" they will ask incredulously?
You'll count the programs you use regularly. It will come to about twenty if you're a power user.
"Well, it's quicker" you'll say in irritation.
At this point, the yoof will tap the Windows key and type 'wo' bringing up Word.
"That's not what I'm talking about!" you'll say angrily. "I can do the same thing in Windows 7"
"Well, if it's the same in both, then it's not a disadvantage, is it?" will say the increasingly irritating yob who probably has an asbo, you're sure of it.
"Yes, but maybe I want to use the mouse. Have you thought about that? There's no Start button in Windows 8"
"Well, it still works the same," says the brat as he moves the mouse pointer to the lower left and clicks.
"But without a button, how would you know how to do that? Huh? Huh? Explain to me that!"
"Well I just remember," says the yoof. "If you can remember where something is in the hierarchical Start menu, it's got to be even easier to just remember which of four corners does what, right?"
"That's not the point," you snap, wondering if you can catch offguard with your stick.
"Well, you'll like this," says the yoof trying to be helpful, "you know how when you have multiple monitors you have to move your mouse all the way to one end in order to click on the Start button? Well in Win 8 the corners are active on every screen and it also has this nice little mouse capture so that you don't overshoot onto the other screen like you might if you had the Win7 Start Button there. Isn't that nice?"
"No! No it isn't! WHERE ARE MY WERTHERS ORIGINALS!"
"And the Start Screen!" you continue. "It takes up the whole page!"
"So? Did you ever keep staring at the Desktop whilst you navigated the Start menu in Win7?"
"And what if I want to change a setting? Eh? Eh?!?!"
"Bottom right. Or Win+C if you don't want to leave the keyboard"
"But that's only got the commonly used settings that I would typically need! What if I want to do something obscure like manage hardware once every couple of months?"
"Windows key and type 'co'. Bang - control panel!"
"But it doesn't give me anything extra! I don't need it! Steve Ballmer is forcing it down our throats! Why don't you hate what I hate you stupid kid!"
"Nothing extra apart from many common tasks requiring less clicks or keypresses...?" The yoof screws up his face in puzzlement. "Well," he says after a moment, "there's this..." At which point he pulls the screen from the keyboard, and happily does everything he did before again, but this time without a keyboard.
"NURSE!" you cry. "Bring me my XP discs. Hurry! The youth of today! They don't hate Microsoft anymore! What's wrong with them???"
Thanks. That lead into the article could do with some clean-up if that's what they meant.
Also - gah: more Amy Pond. Liked her at first, but she got really boring about half way through her first season for me. She was great in The Girl Who Waited, though. One of the few good episodes of Season Six, imo.
I am confused if Amy is going to exit in this episode. Whilst it seems possible, the trailer for the series shows her in several other episodes - one with dinosaurs and one (seemingly) set in the Wild West. It seems doubtful that either or both of these are the Asylum of the Daleks episode this one (apparently) is. So either she carries on after her exit or we're being misinformed about her leaving in this episode.
Perhaps a sensible approach is only to give up the names if there is a sincere intent to challenge what is said as libel. That means if Anonymous Person says: "The CEO is a thief who steals from the pension fund", then you only pursue getting the names if you actually want to examine the allegation in court. Thus you don't ask the courts to unmask someone just so you can find out who says it, they only get unmasked as part of the full littigation process. Isn't that was is happening here anyway?
Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you. Strike Soon your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
"That's not what the release candidate currently shows us."
There are three different modes in Server 2012. There's the "Server Core" mode which lacks the full GUI, there's a full GUI version and there's a completely stripped down mode which you manage with Server Manager and use Microsoft Management Console plug-ins. This last one runs on a normal Desktop and lets you manage lots of GUI-less servers from it. MS have said that Server Core is the preferred mode. Your preview is the one with the GUI apparently, but it is definitely not the recommended approach. Possibly you even selected to have a GUI when installing it?
At any rate, it would have been very easy for you to fact check this before suggesting that the AC above is wrong (they aren't). There's an article that covers the GUI-less aspects of Server 2012 here.
"The games creators are not at all happy about this, and are already porting their games to alternative platforms. [Very interesting article on this in Micromart this week]"
Well Valve are certainly upset anyway - hardly surprising as the MS Marketplace could (probably will) make Steam redundant. But if other game makers have a choice of whether to sell via Marketplace of Steam, surely that choice can only be a good thing for customers. Competition is beneficial, yes?
"MS betting the farm on this is pretty scary"
MS aren't even close to betting the farm on this. They don't expect the entire business world or personal user base to suddenly get up and march to the shops and buy upgrades. Just as they didn't expect it to happen with Windows 7. They even issued advice to Corporate saying they don't advise an immediate rush to upgrade to Windows 8. I have no idea where you got the idea that MS are betting everything on sales of the Surface. It seems primarily to be a stick with which to beat OEMs into shape.
"Does Dell already know that TIFKAM is also present on Server 2012 ? ;-)"
By default, Server 2012 is effectively GUI-less. Powershell is the normal way of managing it and the GUI is essentially a major re-write of the previous tools as wrappers for Powershell commands. Good to see MS finally catching up to Linux in this area. ;)
The reason it is GUI-less is that Server 2012 virtualizes extremely well (both as host and guest). The lack of GUI helps keep the memory and processor footprint small when you have a thousand of these buggers all virtualised. Turning on the GUI when you need it is pretty easy. Likewise, when you're done, you can just turn it off again. Though I imagine most real sysadmins will do everything through Powershell, usually remotely.
...but that's not the point. It's not the breach of information barriers between different governments. It's the breach of information barriers between the governments and the people. The US government may not care much if Russia reads that they have imprisoned some Al Jazeera journalist and tried to force him to become an informant - Russia does the same stuff and worse and no government will be shocked by RealPolitik. But the US people who consider it wrong to abduct a journalist and threaten them in this way, will care.
Stella Rimington is maybe missing the real issue here. The Wikileaks stuff is unlikely to shock or suprise other government level entities for the most part, but it can do both to a government's public. That is why it is perceived as a threat.
...is that you can use them on your own population much more easily. Try to use the army to supress your own population and they will to some extent, but you'll have problems. But a robot can be turned on rioters or protestors just as easily as it can be turned on the enemy. And with centralized control, you need fewer people who are willing to authorise it, than you would need all your rank and file to be willing. Enemy soldiers or children in a crowd, it's all the same to a robot.
I chuckled loudly at The Chestnut Tree. Wonderful piece.
"I think you're missing my point a little."
Well the main point I was addressing was that you wrote a post about how you thought MS were trying to stop people from blocking ads, so I explained in detail why it was very much about something else (security).
Regarding the below however:
"This routine changes (protected) system files. A routine running with system credentials specifically aimed at maintaining the hosts file. That's a huge risk; because if that routine gets compromised (and IMO that's only a matter of time) how long before malware will start changing hosts so that "www.microsoft.com" points to some malware website, or worse? Without the users realizing this of course. Also the fact that it chooses to bypass settings such as setting the file up with r/o."
Okay - software changes system files all the time. Even "protected" ones. Your OS wouldn't be much good if it couldn't or didn't do that. This actually happens all the time. It's not even new to edit the hosts file. Anti-spyware and anti-virus software already does this. And specifically as I explained in my post, malware already does this. If you the user have the capacity to edit the hosts file, then potentially malware can and real world examples of such malware exist in the wild. If you believe that it is new for software to edit the hosts file, then I'm afraid I have to tell you that this is not new to Windows 8. You already have this. It's just that you've only noticed it now because MS have added new security features that have made you aware of it. Yes, these features can be inconvenient to people who edit the hosts file so that makes them either good or bad according to your needs, but they do make the OS more secure.
"Although current malware (Win7 / Vista) could attack the hosts file as well, there is no guarantee that they can succeed. Either due to privileges or the fact that the file can be protected."
This is not theoretical. It happens. Any of the Qhosts family of viruses (e.g. Win32/Qhosts.L will do so. As pointed out, if you the user can edit the file from within the OS, there is always a possibility that Malware could.
"And sure; Win defender can be turned off, but how many end users would do that? Heck; how many would realize the potential risk this gets them?"
How many users would turn of Windows Defender? As many or more as are likely to edit their hosts file.
Maybe you don't like that MS have enabled Windows Defender by default - that's fine, maybe it's not suited to your needs. But you can turn it off *very* easily and the vast majority of users benefit from it being on by default. If you turn it off, then it's no different to having not installed it in the first place, just as you can not install it on Windows 7 if you wish.
Will you accept that you were wrong to make a big post about how MS are trying to stop you from blocking ads and that this actually makes sense?
Good or bad, there's no conspiracy here. It's part of Windows Defender which is on by default on Windows 8. Some malware runs a local webservice and redirects traffic to certain sites (e.g. facebook.com) to itself. If you add an entry to the hosts file that, e.g. redirects facebook.com to localhost, then Windows Defender will spot it and remove the redirect as it thinks it is a phishing attempt.
Very, very few of Windows 8 users will want to put in redirects for sites via the hosts file, but if you want to do this, you can disable Windows Defender and it will leave your hosts file alone. You will want to install your own anti-virus rather than the free one in that case.
It might be that if people kick up a fuss about this, MS will change Defender to not interfere, but then that makes things less secure because Malware could potentially re-direct traffic through altering the hosts file. (If you have permission to edit the file, and there exists the sort of user who will click agree to any downloaded program, then malware can edit the file).
That's why it's there. Your suggestion that it is so that they can force people to see "those adds" has jumped the gun. As has that gigantic "FAIL" icon. I begin to wonder how much you are actually *wanting* to find flaws in Winodws 8 by this point.
"BIG DUMB GUY 555, is that you?"
I think it is - smells of troll. In either case, the same sort of inflammatory, divisive statements. I wonder if El Reg can check the IP addresses or something?
"Profile management - Enter Windows 7 professional. Its not possible on the home editions, but the pro has no problems with this"
Again, you're not actually familiar with the Win8 functionality. (I am currently in Win7 Pro as I type, incidentally). The Win7 controls let you set some basic time limits, control games by rating or title and allow or block specific profiles.
In Windows8, you can monitor the complete activity of the user, select from convenient drop-down lists for web-site categories, communication types allowed (e.g. social networking, chatrooms), stats reports on how the child used the computer. Basically everything you could possibly want to make your kid hate you.
"Software based on authentication keys - Idem on Windows 7. Takes external tools to setup though but its doable. Especially considering that Win7 already provides native support for stuff such as RFID security cards."
Again, you're comparing a car from the 1970's with a modern one and saying you can do the same things, ignoring that it is so much easier and more elegant in the newer ones. If you're corporate, you build the software into the users profile on your network and set the permissions. They bring in their laptop and plug it in - program installed. They disconnect and go home - the program was never there (figuratively speaking).
"Better graphics - Its still the drivers doing all the work."
And the OS determining what work they do. This comment more than any of the others, suggests to me you don't actually know much about this area. For HTML5 and SVG rendering (which forms a core part of the UI in Win8), it can render pages up to 400% faster than WIn7. Check out this video and note how much faster and more smoothly it scrolls though a web-page. Also they've worked on JPG and PNG rendering. Notice how in the video, Win8 goes through a lot faster.
None of this is directly attributable to the graphics drivers. It's OS level stuff.
"Better performance - So far I'm not a believer. Also see an earlier point about performance aspects in Win7."
Well pretty much every bit of testing I've seen from the Benchers says otherwise.
Okay. I'm done. How open-minded are you feelling or did you read all the above with a mental check list of how you could counter any points I made. ;)
"Cloud services - What does "integrates neatly" exactly mean? If I want to I can easily setup my Win7 Explorer so that it can directly access stuff as SkyDrive, S3 buckets and dropbox if need be (mostly using Webdav btw). Within my Office environment I already have the option to directly store documents on SkyDrive"
Hard to put my finger on it. I guess whilst what you list as things you "can" do, they're all things that are streamlined and really, really easy for the casual user to use in Win8. E.g. when I click Save, it has panels for whether I want to save locally, online and very visible and easy control over who I do and don't want to share things with, all from within the program and OS. It's just... slick, really. All feels very natural and under your control. All I can suggest is that you try it. For corporate use, it's *much* easier. You can configure the cloud and its permissions very easily for any systems you deploy. But that's getting into Server 2012 so I'll stop there.
"Performance management tool - Does it really?"
Yes. Really. I don't know what you're calling bells and whistles, probably things like the colour coding on processes so you can see their resource levels at a glance and the way you can pull up online descriptions of a process so you can identify what it is, but those things are useful even if they're only time savers. But there are also things that aren't just time savers, like grouping the processes by application, by type; or handling 64 logical processors and the heat map. Even a real curmudgeon has to concede this is cool.
And yes, you mention the Assessment and Deployment tool. Maybe it does incorporate stuff from elsewhere, but I'm fine with that. It's a powerful performance tool that is now mainstream and has an API so people can build useful tools on top of it. So what if it's an iterative improvement rather than something completely new - most things are built on something else. This comment is my answer to how you can do some of this already in Powershell. Sure, and I'm comfortable on Powershell because I grew up on Bash. But you use this to dismiss things as just "making it easier to access" (your words), but that's a really good thing in itself for everyone who isn't you or me.
"File history tool - Uhm, that has been around since Vista. Check properties, then "Previous versions" tab. Better yet: the Win8 "feature" requires an external drive or network share to work (its disabled by default) whereas this feature in Vista & Win7 is on by default and doesn't require anything extra. Talk about taking a step back in user friendlyness!"
No, trust me. I have used the new one, and I get the strong impression from the number of misunderstandings that you are primarily looking up information on this second hand. It is easier in Win8, no doubt about it. Also doesn't impact other running processes whilst it's active either like previous versions. I'm not sure if you have to use it with an remote or external volume. I think that's just the (rightly) recommended approach. I can't check as I'm not on the Win8 one at the moment. At any rate, I don't personally know anyone who ever used the Vista history functionality. But with the Win8 one which is much more user-friendly, they will.
"Thanks for your extensive response, appreciate the time you took."
No problem. I am always happy to debate with someone who is open to it. You've gone through my list and identified why a number of the advantages are not of interest to you. That's fine. I listed some of the things I could think of from the top of my head because even though you may not need something, it's useful to many others and makes the point that Windows 8 is far from just a new UI which is kind of where you were coming from. That said, I'm rather amazed you got from the long list I wrote down to
"So summing up the main enhancements which I can see are better IPv6 support, easier option to check for hidden files in the Explorer and the inclusion of security essentials."
In all honesty, it makes me want to ask if you can honestly say with your hand on your heart that you weren't trying to dismiss things from my list. No offence meant. But anyway, to answer your own points...
"Faster booting - This is a bit of a hack because in fact the OS uses a section of the disk where it hibernates the OS then simply re-activates that part. Quite frankly; I can do the exact same thing on Windows 7 is I tell it not to shut down but to hibernate"
You've not quite got how it works - it is different to hibernation on Windows 7. In Windows 8, they have separated out the hibernation of the kernel from the application space. My main workstation has 12GB of RAM and I run a lot of programs sometimes. Even if I close my applications down in preparation, it still takes a while to hibernate my machine. Shutting down and re-starting Win8 is not the same as Win7 hibernation. It takes the kernel and some essential parts, and hibernates that. The result is that it shuts down and restarts like lightning. The point is that on Win7, hibernating doesn't save me any time over just shutting the machine down. Win8 is simply massively faster here and Win7 hibernation doesn't compete.
"The 'runs faster' is also disputable considering how much options and eye candy they stripped from parts such as the desktop. If I minimize the visual effects (turn off aero, animations, translucency) I can get my Win7 to run a whole lot faster as well."
Again, you're arguing that you can by doing certain things *make* Win7 as fast as Win8 is by default. It's still a big advantage for many. Though your premise isn't quite right. Win8 also performs faster at non-UI tasks, but I'll address that later otherwise I'm repeating myself.
"chkdsk repairs on a soft-raid volume while its mounted - I can do that with Win7 as well. Unless of course its the system volume, but quite frankly I don't see being able to perform repairs on a mounted and used system volume as an enhancement. I consider this a major risk factor instead"
Firstly, I didn't say carrying them out on a "soft-raid". I just said a mounted volume. That can be any mounted volume and yes - including a System volume. You're comparing it to Re-syncing etc. in Win7. That's not what I'm talking about per se. I'm saying that when you have a disk fault (you must have seen those blue screens where it says "Checking Disk 43% complete" after a power-failure or disk failure). These can typically complete in under two seconds now. That's even faster than my Debian system. And yes - it is useful to be able repair a system disk whilst running, depending on what services your machine is running.
"Multi monitor - Can't comment there since I only use one. What I can say is that it could be expected considering that they've limited the features severely in other areas. Think about running two "TIFKAM" (The Interface Formerly Known As Metro) side by side. Can't be done on lower resolutions, even if those are still pretty common for Office use."
I'm really confused as to what you are referring to here with "can't be done on lower resolutions", so you're going to have to clarify. I think before that you're saying that you think Multi-monitor support is better because of lighter load due to the lighter UI. I suppose that could be a factor if you have a very low-power machine, but it's really nothing to do with it. I'm talking about actual changes, not performance. E.g. when I have three 24" monitors set up, it takes a long time to move the mouse over to the "Start" button in Windows 7. In Win8, I can easily access it by the mouse (as well as the program tabs) on any monitor. Ditto for the settings menu (which you don't have in Win7 as such). I can easily configure different backgrounds for the monitors, it handles different resolutions of different monitors simultaneously whereas in Win7 that can be problematic. It's all round significantly improved. You say you only have one monitor, fine - not a plus for you, but many of us are used to using multiple monitors these days - particularly developers who want to use VMs for development or testing, but also graphics professionals, people who want communications in one window (mail, VoIP) and work in the other.
"So you're saying "Buy it, you might like it". And what, sell it at a loss when you don't? Throw it in the river? Shove it up someone's arse?"
There is a free preview available at the moment. You can use this without any risk to your finances or the backsides or those who know you.
"You really do need a touchscreen to use this mess. It's truly horrible - touchscreen or keyboard / mouse. It's more than slightly unstable, too. It's slow, bloated brokenware."
This is basically crap. First off, I've used Win8 for over a month as my primary OS without any touch interface at all, just keyboard and trackball. Give me a few examples of what you think I can't do without a touch-screen that I'd be able to do on Win7 without one.
More than slightly unstable? I haven't had a single crash. Not saying it can't happen, but my experience and the experience of others that I'm aware of is that it's very stable indeed.
"It's slow, bloated brokenware"
And yet all the performance metrics show that it actually runs faster than Win7. Maybe you think that is "slow, bloated brokenware", but I don't think most people do and this is demonstrably quicker than that.
There's no re-purposing. "Freetard" has always been about people who want something for nothing, e.g. those pirating music, movies or software. That's where it comes from. Nothing to do with Free (Libre) Software. Free Software is almost the opposite of Freetardism in that Free Software is about actively producing and sharing what you've done to others without asking for anything in return, whereas being a Freetard means taking without giving back.
"You say that, but the flight-simulator style file browser was genuine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fsn"
True. That interface could practically have been written for action movies. But I find the suggestion that any hacker faced with a UNIX system rather than a pre-Windows 95 OS as their target system would be relieved... *amusing*. ;)
None of this compares to the Great Computer Programmer Incapacitation of '93, when thousands of IT professionals were hospitalized by the sheer dumbness of Jurassic Park's "It's a UNIX system. I know this!"
That said, I don't know which is more offensive to me - the silly dig at Open Source or the idea that the computer programmer kid should be wearing a knitted tank top and big glasses.
Seriously, it was an unsubstantiated rumour from someone who claimed to know someone who had claimed to be at an internal presentation by MS. There's no way it's going to be $199 unless that's some sort of special deal for MS employees or when bought with Visual Studio Premier or something. Even on the original site the rumour came from, it is filled with posts saying there's zero chance of this. But when something is appealing enough to people, some will believe it without any evidence needed at all.
"And Office on a tablet is such a killer app because?"
You may notice that the Surface has a keyboard attached to it.
"Personally I would think $299 is a more realistic price. If it's $400+ then it's dead in the water and guaranteed a place in every "Failed Tech" article for years to come."
It's more feature capable than an iPad and they sell for that amount of money, so I'm expecting it to come out for around that. I find it hard to believe that anyone here is taking this rumour seriously. If there's anything to it at all, then the price is as part of some package deal of some sort. More likely, this is either just random rumour that has spread amongst the gullible or a malicious marketing trick by an MS rival trying to raise expectations so they can be brought down.
Seriously, there is no way at all that something feature comparable with the iPad is being sold for $199. At all.
"The ARM version can't run "normal" Windows apps and there are no ARM apps yet. At all."
I don't think "At all" means what you think it means. It ships a version of something you might have heard of called MS Office.
Also a browser.
Integrated apps for Social Networking
That's off the top of my head. And then there are other things like a finance app, news apps, travel apps... these were already done in the Windows 8 release preview and as they are pure Metro apps then they work on an RT PC.
And I don't doubt that there will be a lot more coming.
I doubt anyone will wait based on this rumour, because no-one with any sense will believe it. This price? Not a chance. Maaaayyybeeeee as part of a package - get it for this price when you buy Visual Studio Premium or something. But on its own, this price? No.
There's not a chance it will be released for that price. I'd only believe it if I actually saw it and even then I'd double-check. Maayyybeee to MS employees, but to the public, not a chance.
What exactly is it that you need that is missing?
I kind of agree, but depending on how the PDF was created, the process might be nice, or it could be a doorway into nightmare. I have seen a PDF before and after someone who knew what they were doing re-did it. It looked the same both times, but one was over 40MB and rendered like a dog, and the other was 16 MB and I could actually scroll in it. (from memory, but I think those file sizes are right because it was my first experience with how badly a PDF can be constructed).
"I think Stratfor should sue CloudFlare, and I don't even like Stratfor!"
That's kind of funny because I am (genuinely) a subscriber to Stratfor and don't think they should sue Cloudflare. Unless Cloudflare are doing something illegal or immoral (and I don't see a good case for either), then there is no reason to sue. As a subscriber to Stratfor, my issue is with the people who broke open and distributed my subscriber email address (along with many others) and meant I had to change my credit card details. I don't have an issue with the role that Wikileaks is trying to play in bringing to light information that the government would like to supress.
(I have an issue with some particulars of Wikileaks but not the general principle - it's too important to society).
It becomes racism the moment you say another Arab who has nothing to do with them is culpable because of that shared race. Just as there have been some pretty horrendous things done by "Youth Leagues" of other races. Terms liek "towelheads" such as you use have no merit. If you truly want to get rid of such groups as you refer to in Uganda, then you would be better seeking the support of Arabs against them, than casting wide-ranging remarks that encompass people who would agree with you if you didn't treat them as the same as the people you despise.
When you are specific in your criticism, you may find support. When you target a whole race, you promote an Us and Them feeling which is counter-productive.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018