Posts by Mort 26 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Sep 2009
System Centre ConfigMgr still installs Silverlight by default on all client systems to use a component most people probably don't even use. While it is easy to tell it not to install, the option is obscure and not widely advertised or obvious
Wut? KRudd and friends were building the NBN as a completely separate infrastructure to Telstra as you well know. It's Turnbull who is gifting it to Telstra, along with hiring all the ex-Telstra execs to manage it. (Upvote for line connection rort, downvote for KRudd/Telstra/NBN delusion)
Optus had (has?) a home gateway device that would allow your Optus Mobile to connect to a local picocell in your house to give you better mobile coverage if you were in a blackspot. Of course, that picocell then used your Optus internet connection, and your data allowance, to provide that service. On top of that the pico cell *still* needed to be able to pick up a (weak) signal from a proper mobile base station to authenticate the mobile service. So you got to pay extra for the picocell, pay for the internet connection and data, and pay for the mobile service that was connecting to it. TRIPLE PLAY!
So kinda the same thing I guess... why should the carriers bother building their own network when they can double bill the users to provide the service for them?
(Why is there no $$ signs icon?)
I also seem to recall there was something in the Australian Telecomunications act that prevented "non Carriers" from offering a service that allowed them to connect to the internet. It was something that caused a headache for the "Sydney Wi-Fi" open-mesh network that started many years ago. If so, then perhaps it is still OK for Telstra to charge for access "over their equipment", but the user can't earn anything from it without breaching the act... or some such loophole I'm sure Telstra would use to explain the rort.
I'm surprised you didn't slip in his closing comment "The ITU is at the heart of humanity". It was a very hard hitting interview.
"Australia: Aiming to be #1 telecommunications role model for third world countries everywhere"
BTW - The video in the article doesn't show for me, but here's one I found earlier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--AYO26hghk&sns=tw
Hence the reason *I* don't call these bricked, especially given the steps many non-techie users have been able to follow in this instance to recover it.
I think we all agree on the intent of functional vs non-functional, it's just the words that are appropriate to describe them where there is lack of consensus.
Still arguing semantics here. Bricked depends entirely on the capabilities of the person recovering the device. If you don't know how to recover it yourself, it's bricked to you, hence if you find a fix, you can un-brick it. (pretty sure that's a valid term isn't it?)
If a manufacturer can get the device working again, then would that mean it is "really confused" rather than just "slightly confused".
I do understand your point about teaching people the *correct* usage for "bricked", but like "hacker" or "troll", I think it is a battle you can't win despite our best efforts.
Howdy,
As the original blogger, I'd be more inclined to call it "stuffed" than bricked. For the "ordinary" user though I'd say there isn't a whole lot of difference, so just arguing semantics I'd say. There isn't really anything super magical about the fix, it's just knowing that there is even a step to fix it in the first place.
The file I provide isn't anything other than an ARM copy of the WinPE recovery boot disk (only the boot files, not the full system recovery). That is probably the biggest challenge as you need access to a working RT device to create one from scratch if you don't know the trick of duplicating one.
I was going to add a script that would take you straight to the command prompt and run the command, but I was concerned asking people to download and run stuff "blind" was a big enough risk without having someone accuse me of "tampering" and trying to run stuff on their tablet. The steps aren't that hard, and in the end I didn't really feel like doing any more of Microsoft's job for them.
Many a night after work was spent playing NC-SNIPES. Each game round had a Mars bar as a standard bet for the winner. I dare say learning how to bounce shots at angles around corners is what made me the snooker player I was (back then at least).
Oh yeah, and it also did file and print sharing stuff as well, for months on end without ever needing a reboot...
Sure, I hate doing my BAS even once a quarter, and will hate the way this will mess up the cashflow situation. The biggest hassle is that the amount I "earn" for PAYG differs every month, so in some ways you just make up a number that is kinda close, and then balane it all at the end of the year. I can't see how this would make people go out of business or be more inclined to "take cash" though.
When I recently restarted contracting, the ATO had me doing a monthly PAYG-Installment, so I'm guessing any new changes would just be an extension of something like that. If so, then this might be focused more on Taxi-Drivers and people doing piece work.
For my part, I'll just put "72 hours" on the bottom of the form where it asks how long it took to fill in.
Why would you do job number comparisons between OS job and Programming/developer jobs? Did you also compare how many job just listed "Windows" without being specific on version?
I'm sure Microsoft won't complain if businesses decide to upgrade from XP to Win7 instead of Win8. It's still a license sale, and hopefully another job for me helping that company upgrade.
So let Win8 take the consumer space. Business can have Win7, and then in another 10 years they can upgrade at the last minute again like they are with XP.
Personally, I don't care if businesses upgrade to 7 or to 8. It's pretty much exactly the same effort to design/develop and implement. Personally, I'm a Win8 convert.
I don't see how Firefox is any better. Every "web browser market share" report I see has to list numerous versions of Firefox, so while the *latest* version might be safe from known exploits, there are still plenty of older versions still in-use that are exploitable.
MS has been trying to get people to upgrade IE version for years, but it's the corporates that insist on IE6 because it's "easier/cheaper" to ignore unknown possible security threats than the known cost of having to do actual testing for their crappy internally written applications.
On one hand, when MS "force" people to upgrade IE, everyone complains about MS being too controlling. When MS let people upgrade themselves, then MS gets blamed for all the crappy old versions still out there when people don't upgrade. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
I notice you forgot to mention the suport truck with a diesal generator on the back that had to follow them the whole trip to recharge the car on the other sections of the race. All up the truck and generator probably used more fuel than *all* the competing cars combined.
So firefox is going to take on the responsibility of telling people when their non-firefox adobe product isn't up to date. I guess Adobe happy to know they don't need to bother doing that anymore? Why would they build this into the product and not just make it part of some "updates notification" plugin?
So what happens when:
1. The Firefox devs get bored of maintaining this notification service?
2. Why just Adobe, if it's that important then should they do it for all products and add-ins?
The idea is commendable, but ultimately unworkable. They are taking ownership for a task that isn't theirs to own, and will ultimately just create more work for someone who has to keep track or the notifications. If that person goes on holidays, who will do it then?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
