Google product, privacy
Am I missing something?
324 publicly visible posts • joined 5 Aug 2008
When found to be a monopoly, Microsoft was supposed to be forced to play nice. How will the entities that enforce the various agreements with regulatory agencies make it so Microsoft actually produces a functional product without the worst of the latest self-serving possibilities we are now seeing?
Most likely, nothing will happen. They're all in it together. It's just that governing bodies have their own way of getting in on the action, with fines, fees and favors that most of us will never know about.
I know someone who introduces himself as an "investment banker" or alternates with "entrepreneur." To me, he's just someone who has failed in many a startup business venture.
With this latest crash and burn, the investors are just the type this person is looking for: eternal deniers of reality.
They're looking into it:
Reason for Revision: V1.1 (November 11, 2015): For MS15-115, added a Known Issue for KB3097877. Microsoft is looking into reports of crashes from some customers that occur when they view certain emails after Windows security update 3097877 is installed. An immediate review is under way.
that Windows 7 would be Microsoft at its peak. Windows 7 was the fix that people wanted. Everything to follow has been a failure of management to bend their employees to the customer's will. Nobody at MS wants to listen to its customers, corporate or private. They seem to think they know better and BillG isn't there to change that.
Pride goeth before a fall...
I can tell you how that ends. A large quasi-governmental organization I knew of once had a non-technical supervisor arrange the best possible deal for "commodity" computers. The whole deal went to Gateway. Prices went up, quality and selection went down, then Gateway went into bankruptcy. Anyone who actually cooperated with the contractor instead of getting exceptions approved regretted their lack of effort.
Government has a wonderful way of putting all of its eggs into one basket. Those of us who wish to stay sane at work need to avoid the inevitable consequences, somehow.
This thrashing over a supposedly new way of doing things is rather short-sighted.
Remember when Sun said the computer was the network, but nobody had the bandwidth to make a global client-server network?
Now that we can do it, it's not necessarily the thing to do.
Leasing in the cloud will have its place, just like smartphones, tablets and desktops have theirs.
Chill, people. It's all a matter of alternatives and using them as you see fit.
Tucci (electronically) signed a message to EMC customers today that said, in part,
"Michael S. Dell, MSD Partners, and Silver Lake are leading a transaction...Following completion of the transaction, Michael will lead the combined company as chairman and chief executive officer...this transaction will create a new leader in the most critical areas of the $2 trillion information technology market..."
The word "transaction" was mentioned five times before Mr. Tucci concluded that it was all for the best.
I wonder what he calls a takeover, a controlled merger, an avaricious acquisition or any other stock-wrangling extravaganza?
It's only a world of transactions after all.
They've broken Office as well. If it was installed before an upgrade, Outlook gives a continuous error until you run a system scan and have it repair a couple of .mui files.
With something so valuable to the MS ecosystem broken, it'll surely be fixed immediately, right? Right?
Waiting patiently...
Windows 10 is a complete non-starter. It's not just the impossible Start thing or the difficulty of finding any ordinary work application just to get going with a spreadsheet or data application. It's the fact that the fixes, such as Classic Shell, can't be used by corporate desktops for free or get past the approval process.
That's the real issue here: businesses won't be using an operating system that requires retraining, endless hours of fixing the base installation and the long wait for compatible versions of their approved and mandated software.
The consumer crowd will reluctantly buy what's available, some will even be happy with it, but the people who have to get some work done won't be happy with another revision of what Microsoft thinks is the way they should be getting things done.
That's the crux of all Windows faults. They have forgotten the OS business that gave them such a large market share and are chasing a market they don't understand. The desktop experience and what people do with phones don't need to be identical--which is an impossible goal for any decent functionality on either group of devices.
Apps are apps because they are lightweight applications that work on phones. But nobody wants a crippled desktop because its been reduced to phone functionality.
What would really be wrong with a desktop OS, a decent tablet adaption and a phone that works?
If this truly is a fundamental flaw in the OS, it's going to take another version to fix it. We can expect to see new programmer training and new versions of most OSx compatible apps with the next variation.
It's bound to happen. Write once, run only in the old version, write it again to run it in the new and improved secure version.
Most of these strained attempts at justifying the technology seem to be of the type--"If only we had known it was you, we would have treated you better."
But is there really anything a machine can do for you by recognizing you? Other than some biometric applications, the rest of this stuff seems to be related only to crowd control by threat of identification.
If you really want to read a book, and have to type one to do what a few clicks in the GUI can do, install the server core.
But why eliminate what can communicate so much more quickly than anything in endless text can do?
BTW, the GUI tools don't work right on the majority of BrandX desktops out there, so if you're not logging on from a Windows system, you have to have a remote desktop to see what you're doing.
I've always thought this fascination with typing is a self-deceptive phenomenon. You don't really do more by more finger action, you just think you did.
I actually remember the Perry Mason appearance and the Mission Impossible series due to my habit of watching old TV late at night while deleting junk mail. Leonard always made a character worth watching.
I usually don't like the comedy stuff, but the Big Bang Theory appearance was very well done. Because it was really an homage to the cultural icon nature of Star Trek without the overbearing fan boys trying to get too much out of it, I will admit it was good for sci-fi as a whole.
Something like this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPkByAkAdZs
I'm going to miss Leonard Nimoy too.
The old saying...one step forward and two steps back. The Start menu/screen can no longer be emptied so it's just a vertical column, which is all you need. If you remove what you don't want, you get empty space, kind of like the empty stare most people use when they see this result. The new grouping of start items is equally worthless as users aren't allowed to make their own categories.
When Microsoft can no longer do an operating system that people want to use, their future is lost. Nobody really cares about their other products, except maybe Office which they are making less useful daily, and they are rapidly eliminating their core business while chasing Internet services income.
It all brings to mind another saying: a bird in the hand...
What bothers me most about redesigns is that they nearly always make a site less useful What is it that people think are proper design goals?
I have seen this trend toward white-out design in too many places, now it has struck here. And that big graphic? I prefer the one that I could scroll through if needed.
The whole site now looks overly bright (on the screen, not necessarily more clever) and less useful.
It actually takes only a bit of reason and some nearly accurate measurements to determine the dimensions of a meridian, with the prime meridian being an arbitrary point, for a planetary body. Here is a reasonable explanation of how Eratosthenes did it:
http://geography.about.com/od/historyofgeography/a/eratosthenes.htm
We can do the same more easily from orbit and have created accurate vertical datum for nearby planets of interest, such as Mars:
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/faqs/faq_sci.html
Beyond that, a universe-wide GPS that helps us navigate amongst the bodies is more complex than describing the ones we can observe.
What is not obvious about touch and movement being needed to operate any part of a touch-screen device? What is not prior art about all of the other devices that used touching and moving to "unlock" them?
Insanity has not been patented, it has only been practiced by the USPTO. Plenty of prior art there.
The problem with MS file management has always been that the progress indicator for copying or moving files took the total number of files measured against the rate of transfer for the most recent few files to arrive at a total time estimate, which was updated periodically. This made for time estimates of, at first, 2 minutes, followed by 3 days, then 18 hours, 14 minutes, 98 minutes, and so on.
Using the total number of bits to transfer divided by the transfer rate would have been better, but apparently too complicated for MS programmers.
These cloud systems have fallen down more often than any data center I have been involved with. They must be too complex for the people running them--or have management decisions, influenced by marketing types, led to over-promising things that haven't been designed into the systems?
You wouldn't see these situations if they stuff they promised was actually functional.