13 minutes ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

I define it the same way that the legal profession does. Put it to a jury. Let them decide whether the tax-return is a valid representation of the company's tax affairs, or whether they are fabricated financial structures designed to avoid the paying of taxes that parliament and the treasury intended and expect companies to pay.

If we decide whether someone goes to jail by presenting the jury with evidence and them deciding if a law was broken, why can't we do the same with CFOs and blatantly tax-evading tax returns?

Interesting world you live in... where if someone does something you don't like... they should be thrown before a jury to decide if it was actually illegal or not... never mind the costs involved (on both sides of such a system.

Unrelated, you have routinely offended my sensibilities on this site, I demand that you be hauled before a jury to answer for your 'crimes'.

First amendment you say? Isn't it for the jury to decide if you are actually violating some law which may be invented or discovered later.

20 hours ago, Bass wrote

You all aren't getting the point. Corporations don't invent things not unlike how publishers don't author books. It's correct to say you are the inventor, just like you say John Doe is the author of a book. Regardless who "owns" it. You don't say the publisher is the author of the book just because the publisher owns the copyright on it. And in most jurisdictions misrepresenting the original creator can land you into some hot legal sh!t (even if you own the "rights"). This idea is called having moral rights over the work, and it's an unalienable and non-revokable human right exclusive to the original author and inventor. Literally (see: UN convention on human rights).

You realize that the entire ghostwriting industry (and history) pretty much invalidates what you've said... right?

Edit: Not to mention gestational surrogacy.

21 hours ago, PopeDai wrote

Personally I'd have preferred it if Nokia had a nomenclature like "Lumia 920 CDMA" or "Lumia 820 for T-Mobile".

I don't think the carrier marketing folks would like that.

Go back to the launch of Windows Phone 8... AT&T exclusively got the Lumia 820 (and advertised it with that word)... while Verizon had a very very very similar but not identical phone known as the 822.

If you haven't noticed it yet...carriers in the US like to tout exclusivity of this or that device... and having an identically named & speced phone takes away from that ability.

You really need to sing it more often as it's quite catchy... even if misguided.

8 hours ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

*snip*

Entirely in the realm of possibility. Especially if we are talking about the time-frame of the next decade.

Really? Then you'll obviously believe anything... lets try another wild and made up claim (much like virtually every word you've said here):

I heard... that the upcoming Xbox announcement is just about a new 'XDrone' feature in the Xbox that enables it to target inferior gaming consoles as well as terrorists for missile attacks. I think it's irresponsible that Microsoft and Rand Paul haven't come out and addressed the rumors I just started and indicated whether or not this feature can be disabled or not... because I don't want to have to deal with coming home to find the remains of my wife's Nintendo WII in a smoking crater.

The regular Small Business Server was killed after Office 365 was set-up. Microsoft gave a huge middle-finger to all the protests and objections.

It's so much fun hearing you spout lies about things you obviously know little about.

I'll tell you a little secret... I was on the HSBS (Home and Small Business Server) team for a bit.

What exactly do you call 'regular Small Business Server'? If you mean the version that came with Exchange & SQL server in the box... those features were removed prior to Office 365 being setup... in fact, the announcement you were hyper-ventilating about was more of a re-branding.

Have you tried Windows Server 2012 Essentials? I have... it's just like Windows Small Business Server 2011 (which I helped build)... only it runs on Server 2012 and has some additional features (including Office 365) *gasp*!

Wait... they only really renamed the product?

Of course... none of this is new... you've also been screaming about how WPF is dead... and yet it was obviously updated in the 4.5 .NET framework (as well as Windows 8/2012)... I wonder what other 'facts' you are making up?

2 minutes ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

So do you just ignore Microsoft actions and assume because Microsoft isn't making statements about them that everything is just rainbows and sunshine?

I seem to be getting hoarse repeating myself as you clearly aren't listening. I have seen no actions that are a definite sign that the desktop is dead... NONE.

You also forget the fact that this company (like most) tend not to announce every manner of detail about the future months or years in advance... or did I miss the Microsoft branded truck with the megaphone driving around yelling "Ding dong the desktop is dead!"? I've seen many strange and/or interesting sights in Redmond (the Warthog, SteveB, third party companies flying aircraft trailing banners over campus to try to convince us to buy this or that, life size statues of gaming characters (and much more))... but still not that.

It's pretty clear they've ceased priniciple development of WPF/SL.

Not being on the WPF or SL team...  I wouldn't be able to comment.

If I take your line of reasoning I'd still be recommending those technologies be used for our customer's projects. If Microsoft isn't going to continue to invest in something then I'm not going to recommend it to customers.

Is the Win32 API dead? It occurs to me that we've not heard much news out of that area. OMG! Win32 programming is dead!!! Quick! Tell the Office and Visual Studio teams to stop whatever they are doing as it is obviously pointless!

It seems to me your version of rational thinking amounts to closing one eye and plugging one ear.

One who rejects rational thinking might come to that conclusion... yes. Again I remind you of developers. It would be a strange world of Microsoft were to remove the desktop from Windows and suddenly prevent developers from developing for and on their platform.

No news isn't necessarily good news.

Correct... but no news is also by definition 'no news'... and making crap up is even less news.

Ford? There's an infinite number of monkeys outside who want to talk to us about this script for 'Hamlet' they've worked out

8 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

I don't think MS does either.

If you route the calls through Microsoft servers then...

Sometimes you may not have a choice.

If two conversing people both have largely unrestricted internet connections with UPnP capable routers... then yes, it's probably very likely that the voice/video conversation would be a direct point-to-point conversation.

If on the other hand both users are behind non-UPnP capable routers as well as firewalls which do not support incoming connections... then some intermediary proxy would be needed... and Skype providing that service would make perfect sense... even with many of the drawbacks associated with it as the only alternative is either to 1) deny these users access to the system, or 2) leech off of some unsuspecting users bandwidth in a major way.

9 hours ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

*snip*

 

Apples and oranges much? How much investment is tied to calc.exe? Yes, if they are serious about the desktop, they should frigging show it!

 

Would it kill Ballmer if Microsoft would offer a definitive statement that the billions of dollars investment into desktop software and infrastructure around the world is not for nil? That would surely be a change amidst all the "legacy desktop" talk.

Again... an absence of a specific statement does not indicate the opposite... and no matter how much trolling you do doesn't change it.

If you wanted to get really conspiratorial... why expand your paranoia to something like:

Clearly then Microsoft is preparing to kill IIS, SQL Server, SMB and even Windows Server because almost anything you can do on-premises you can now do in the cloud with Azure... Microsoft has said nothing about the ability to host on-premises web sites or servers in the next decade... clearly they are going to kill it!

Just a little bit of rational thinking is far better at making predictions than what we are seeing from you here.

5 minutes ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

So, where is Microsoft's assurance for the desktop?! There is NONE. If Microsoft is so serious about it, maybe they should show it.

Or we could just say:

So where is Microsoft's assurance for shipping a calculator in Windows?! There is NONE. If Microsoft is so serious about it, maybe they should show it.

While I have no influence or insights into the exact future of the Windows desktop, calculator or other such areas (these days I'm working in an unannounced and very niche area in Server that will make an awesome Channel 9 video when we go public)... I learned long ago that an absence of a definitive specific statement does not necessarily indicate the opposite.

You know... Microsoft also hasn't said what the next version of many of it's products will be named... know what that means? Absolutely nothing!

A little bit of non-conspiratorial/paranoid thinking goes a long way.

No, right now Windows 8 + enhancements is better for the existing desktop users than going Mac + Windows emulator. But it's not better than Windows 7.

And yet that's not what you said to start with.

Steam?! Who is trolling here who? The counter sites are far more representative than a game service.

No... it's called thinking broadly without getting caught up in pointless minutia.

Most computer users don't upgrade just because a new version of anything is out... most upgrade when what they have is dead, too slow, or so uncool that they must upgrade... but also do it in certain semi-predictable waves (more on that in a few).

The Steam survey does measure a smaller group of users... but also a group that is more likely to upgrade (HW or SW) more frequently than an average user.

Even so, Windows 8 share lagged behind the 3.3% share that Vista scored after its third full month of availability. In fact, last month's seven-tenths of a point gap between the two was more than double the difference of three-tenths of a point in December, indicating that Windows 8 is not only not matching Vista's pace, but failing further behind.

So, Vista was at 3.3% after three months, Windows 8 is just at 3.8% after double the period. Not to mention that Vista was released for the general public well after the Christmas season, while W8 got the black Friday and Christmas boost, and despite this is still well behind.

I see what you did there... you ignored some #'s... you mentioned where Vista was 3 months out, but ignored your second article's comments about Vista 6 months out which are far less dire for 8:

Vista, by way of contrast, showed far more explosive growth. In June, 2007, it had 4.54% market share

So ~6 months after release... Vista was at 4.54%... and just yesterday it was reported that Windows 8 (~6 months since release) 3.82%... a little behind % wise sure, but ignoring the psychology of upgrade cycles... you still seem to be missing two important things:

1. The economy in many a country is still not in tip top shape (In 3/2013 the unemployment rate in the US was 7.6%... while in 6/07 it was just 4.6%... you seem to be discounting the possibility that peoples abilities to get & maintain stable and gainful employment could affect purchasing.

2. The PC market has expanded significantly since 2007, meaning it takes many more sales in order to hit the same % numbers.

We'll also ignore the fact that Windows 8 is fighting the same battle that Windows 7 did... competing against previous versions which still offer a compelling experience that runs on hardware which does age as badly as HW of just a few years earlier.

Not to mention Windows 8 is doing so poorly despite being a tablet OS as well.

So the fact it is a new product in a fairly established market with existing and entrenched players has no baring on what kind of headwinds it might be facing? Riiiight. I wonder what your excuse about Mac OS (desktop & laptop) or Linux (desktop & laptop) market share is.

Lets think some more... shall we? I know it's hard...

When it comes to cars... how many people do you think say "Oh the new model year is out! Time to go trade in what I've got and get the latest and greatest?

Not many.

Some (like me) drive their old vehicle into the ground and keep on going before getting something new.

Most though tend to be content with what they have until their general satisfaction has gone down just enough that the wiz-bang-wow new models suddenly justify the cost & hassle of getting something newer. Sometimes they go out immediately and get something... more often (provided their isn't an immediate motivating factor like an existing dead vehicle)... they'll wait for the next thing to come out.

PCs are similar. Most businesses upgrade on a 3-4 year cycle while most users tend to be in a 3-5 year cycle (in my personal experience).

XP was approaching 5 years old by the time Vista came out and with the age of the 'old' stuff and the newness of the new... upgrading (either full PC or just OS) is a very attractive proposition.

Vista was 3 years old when Windows 7 came out... the same age 7 was when 8 came out.

In both cases... HW purchased at the start of each OS cycle was still at the lower end of the normal upgrade cycle, which means that an immediate upgrade is less likely unless there is something major to justify the hassle and cost of an upgrade (just like I said above about cars, funny that).

Overtime we'll see more and more XP, Vista and 7 machines be replaced with ones running 8... just as fewer and fewer later model cars on the road as they are replaced by more recent ones.

If I didn't know any better... I'd say that you've got a vested interest in Windows 8 failing... but then I cannot imagine why you'd waste your time with such a proposition that is so unrelated to you... which strikes me as a rather sad way to live ones life.

29 minutes ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

Microsoft's goal seems to be to get rid of the desktop entirely

Citation please.

Or at least consider/explain what I said above... without a desktop... how are developers of just about any kind going to get their work done? Do you really see Visual Studio being rebuilt to run as a modern app?

I guess such environment would be severely crippled - like no drag-drop between other desktop applications, only one main window visible etc... just like the other metro victims.

Any other non-existent future tech you want to predict? Maybe nuclear powered toasters which only toast one side of the bread? Or maybe TVs which run on kitten images... but that explode any time a puppy image is displayed?

Making stuff up is so much fun!

Now given this recent Azure news it looks like you are going to be depended on a always-on internet connection and you need to pay up monthly fees.

This is why I try not to pay much attention to rumors and purported leaks... no matter how credible sounding the news is (if true) or what the topics are about (including those things I'm interested in) as there can/are often details that are not initially reported which may put things in a completely different light.

Or... it could be you are doing just what your name implies... trolling on a forum.

Given this future

Which future? The one you are assuming will exist based on fairies and make-believe?

Of course, right now, W8 with Start8 is the better choice for existing Windows users. But if Microsoft marches on with metro, Mac with Windows virtualization will be the better choice in the future.

Wait a second... did you just claim that Windows 8 + Start8 is a better choice for existing Windows users than simply sticking with what they already have? I guess Windows 8 must not be all bad then compared to Windows 7... or even better in a few important ways. Just as a broken clock can be right twice a day... so too can a troll actually be correct from time to time it seems.

By the way, According to netmarketshare.com Windows 8 gained 0.50% in April and is now at 3.82%.

Latest Steam hardware survey puts Windows 8 at 11.65%.

Absolutely pathetic compared to Vista's run in its day,

Citation? Your site requires signing up for anything earlier than 2008 data... and looking at data 12-24 months after the Vista release doesn't seem fair when comparing to a six month old OS.

You also assume that the PC market is today as it was years ago... where untold billions of people would run out the day a new version of Windows was released... just to be running the latest and greatest... and that absolutely nobody out there simply waits for an old PC to die before purchasing a new one with whatever OS it might come with.

1 hour ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

Not quite right; while there is some effort to push electric cars ( ~ W8 Store Apps) the vast majority of dollars and effort is going into petrol cars (~ Windows desktop). Of course with Windows we see exactly the opposite with most of Microsoft's efforts going into W8 Store Apps/environment and next to nothing going into the desktop other than moving its features over to the prior.

So... Toyota, GM, Tesla, etc should all give up on building electric cars... because the market has spoken and petrol cars have obviously won out, will never be fully replaced and they shouldn't waste their time or money building things that only a very small niche of users want today?

17 hours ago, GoddersUK wrote

*snip*

Skype (real time video and audio, at least) is p2p. It costs Microsoft jack to run, except a few login servers.

Oh? I thought at least some of that changed.

1 hour ago, evildictait​or wrote

Metro is cool. It's swishy, it's got lots of nice features, it's a really nice platform. But it's not a replacement for the Desktop. It's an addition to it.

Doesn't that depend on the user? When I look at many of the non-power users around me... most can or do happily live in the 'modern' world as they simply care about being able to read/send email and browse the web... plus maybe use a specific app or two extra.

In previous years these same people would consider Internet Explorer or Firefox their 'desktop'... as it was through it that they got to everything.

Like you I'm shocked (and a bit saddened) anytime I hear people say that the desktop is dead or that it's being moved away from fully (for some apps sure, but then we saw a similar movement more than a decade ago with the push towards the web).

Will the desktop ever go away fully? I highly doubt... I suspect not though for one simple reason:

Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers.

While I could imagine many a situation where a desktop-less version of Office could get a person by... how many Web/Windows Store App/Phone Phone App/Desktop/System developers do you think could get by with a modern version of Visual Studio?

Are they/we a niche? In many respects yes... but so are desktop PCs (compared to laptop and tablet sales)... and despite the majority of users these days happy with their portable devices, there is enough demand for a desktop form factor for more power users that I'd expect to see the desktop live on for much the same reason.

Why? Only the Windows 8 version of Hyper-V requires SLAT. Server 2012 doesn't (but will still take advantage of it if present), and at last check the Windows Phone 8 development tools don't care which SKU you are on, so long as you are running 8/2012.

I was doing this at home until I finally built a new PC which had SLAT.

1 day ago, wastingtime​withforums wrote

But 99% of the usability issues people have is due to the loss of the start menu.

Citation please.

I seem to recall the decision to remove the start button being based on data from the Customer Experience Improvement Program... such as most users NOT clicking the start button and most users relying instead on pinned frequent apps.

@Dan276:So don't use RT apps.

Non-RT versions of Windows 8 still run desktop apps just fine. I vividly remember the new start menu landing in the internal builds of Windows I was running a couple of years back. Sure there was a brief learning curve (same tends to happen anytime you do a major rev of... anything).

Windows 7 has long been banned from my home, and now everything is running Windows 8 and all are happy... even in cases where the device is not touch enabled.

12 hours ago, PopeDai wrote

I saw a fair few people on campus using Surface RT devices (about the same number that I've seen using iPads), but they've been dwindling lately - my friends and coworkers who also received their technically-not-yours Surfaces report that they keep them around the home for couch web-surfing or watching Netflix at the dinner table - but overall, I'm seeing less and less of them.

I must be one of the odd ones then (wait, we knew that)... as I find my Surface RT far nicer to carry to a meeting to take notes on (or keep up with email on). If I suspect the meeting only requires my awareness but not my full attention... then my full laptop comes along for actual dev work.

It gets couch duty as well when at home, but it has become in invaluable companion in general to me since October.

4 hours ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

I don't work for MSRC, are you mad? No I'm in b25.

Wait... they let you move to main campus? Madness!

6 hours ago, wkempf wrote

*snip*

You mean it's not?

That's like saying the drug war down in Mexico which from time to time spills across the boarder is also "sounds a lot like two immature whingebags fighting their own little war." ... but only when viewed from a distance and without paying much attention

Where there is money to be made and a willingness to ignore the law... force will be used to protect it.

For most people, the only indication they have of the underground drug economy/war is when you see a story on the news about a shootout between rival gangs or some government agency announcing a drug bust and showing off the amount of drugs and cash they seized.

Physical borders being what they are to the internet, many an international group has long been attracted who attempt to find their own way to make quite a bit of money with it.

Again, be it police being successful in pushing drug producers/transporters/dealers/etc out of a given area, or widely used black lists successfully decreasing the effectiveness of ones profit making ventures... force is to be expected from those who see the law as something to be ignored.

1 hour ago, elmer wrote

However, Spamhaus don't 'block' anyone, they simply collate a list of servers that they believe are spammers, and people can choose to use it or not - freedom of internet choice.

Their lists are however used by ISPs to block.

This sort of thing has happened before... where anti-spam organizations have been successful in their aims, leading to the lashing out of the no-good-nicks who feel wronged because their viagra messages ads are now less likely to be seen.

22 hours ago, Dan276 wrote

*snip*

No, this thread started in 2013

Maybe not here... but I'm sure there is no chance that that you've referenced it elsewhere in such long threads about such nonsense.

Or to quote you (in part) a few pages (10) into that thread:

Oh and yeah I'm gonna get torched on this message board cus I don't have as many Cheevos as most of you. This board is one of the rare places where I don't have as much cred.

Time to say Places++?