Comments

My guess is after a SSD upgrade, Windows XP runs OK on these machines because the first computers pre-installed with Windows XP were released in 2001. Average machines of that time period had similar performance specs to these low-powered systems.

Remember Windows XP's minimum system requirements are only a 233 MHz CPU with 64 MB RAM.

I was kind of hoping that the discussion would have been a tad more technical.

I would have liked to have known a timeline for Moonlight development and what features in Silverlight spec it will support.

One thing to point out, though:

Miguel is right about people's perception of Microsoft. I think people's negative connotation towards Microsoft stems ultimately from buisness practices and not the technology behind their products. For the most part, Microsoft has proved it can now build decent, reliable products.

The open source community is overally critical of Microsoft because of their market position and influence in the industry, which has made it astronomically challenging for FOSS technologies to a gain a foothold and adoption. Most notably, however, is Microsoft's IP threat to FOSS community and its ability to inflict a mortal blow; for that reason, Microsoft has positioned themself as the corporate villian to FOSS--second only to SCO, who have already litigated.

Is this guy related to Richard Stallman in anyway? :O

Good video nevertheless.

Good interview.

Mark described alot of complicated stuff in human language.

Good interview.

It wasn't too techincal, yet informative.

zian wrote:

What's with the cryptic filename? I don't have any idea what TR001 is.

They want to avoid that 8.3 filename truncation.

Rory wrote:


I suppose that yours is somehow a much more objective point of view.

Why yes. I clearly stated an advantage. After all, there are only hundreds of millions people in the world who use other platforms besides Windows.

Rory wrote:


I honestly don't know what you mean by this.

It means that even if these platforms had greater marketshare, you would devise the same or simular remark when questioned as to why it still remained Windows-centric.


Regards,
Vincent

Rory wrote:

(and better)

Thats purely subjective and expected from a biased employee.

Rory wrote:

2. Your opinion has been noted. Considering that this is a desktop app, and considering that Linux and FreeBSD have extremely little desktop market penetration, I don't think it's a big deal. And OS X users are used to being left out (I know - I'm one of 'em).

Thanks for noting it. If Linux and FreeBSD werent so insignificant, your excuse would be as vague as your remark about Mac OS X, correct?


Regards,
Vincent

Rory wrote:


Linux is redundant.

Already had Unix. Already had other operating systems.

Don't need Linux.

(Do you see how tiring comments like these can get? Do we need them in every thread?)

We dont need Windows either.

Anyway...

In my opinion, cross-platform support is a key advantage when competiting products rival eachother otherwise.


Regards,
Vincent

This seems to be Microsoft's answer to Google Earth and quite redundent if you ask me. The only difference seems to be that Virtual Earth 3D integrates into Live Search as a web service; whereas Google Earth is a client app?

Google Earth now has the major advantage of natively running on Windows, OS X, Linux, and FreeBSD.


Regards,
Vincent