Entries:
Comments:
Posts:

Loading User Information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading User Information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements

Discussions

Elmer elmer I'm on my very last life.
  • Steve Jobs on Flash

    Rumours are that Jobs might have to explain Apple's position on this (and other things) to the DOJ and/or FTC

     

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/an_antitrust_app_buvCWcJdjFoLD5vBSkguGO

  • Steve Jobs on Flash

    brian.shapiro said:
    PaoloM said:
    *snip*

    I just found this article on Reuters,

     

    Microsoft echoes Apple view on Adobe's Flash

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63T47V20100430?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+reuters/technologyNews+(News+/+US+/+Technology)">http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63T47V20100430?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+reuters/technologyNews+(News+/+US+/+Technology

     

    Which seems pretty biased, by suggesting that Microsoft is endorsing Apple's position when there's no evidence they are. The general manager of IE just agreed with Apple that Flash has some technical issues. Obviously, because they're developing Silverlight, they think Flash has some place in the market too.

     

     

    That's from IEBlog

     

    http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2010/04/29/html5-video.aspx

     

    Posted by Dean Hachamovitch... for whatever that's worth.

  • Steve Jobs on Flash

    brian.shapiro said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    And Microsoft doesn't sue over re-implementations of .NET, so all of that is just technical details. The real issue is whether Steve Jobs is really being honest in supporting an 'open web' or whether its just political cover because they want to control the iPod platform.

    Interesting article on Anantech

     

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/3682/adobe-enables-gpu-flash-acceleration-in-os-x-we-test-it

     

    As the story goes, until a week ago, Apple would not provide the required OS/X APIs to allow Flash to use efficient GPU acceleration.

     

    Last week Apple released some APIs, and a week later Adobe (that supposed foot-dragger) released it’s preview of GPU accelerated Flash for OS/X.

  • FB> old school c9... scoble / charles ...arguing ;)

    blowdart said:
    PaoloM said:
    *snip*

    I'm beginning to think this sharing of PI is like free love in the 60s. Those of us who are older just don't understand it.

     

    And like free love in 10 years time some of the practitioners will be stuck with consequences they can never get rid of.

    I just don’t get Facebook.

  • Mac OSX to get the App Store treatment?

    According to the article, future versions of MacOSX will require developers to submit their wares to the app store.

     

    Furthermore... because of BootCamp, all Windows apps will now have to be approved by Apple.

     

    I read it on the internet, so it must be true...

  • Can someone explain the Vista lifecycle to me?

    wastingtimewithforums said:
    W3bbo said:
    *snip*

    "With the "unified" model Microsoft needs to sort this out."

     

    I am wondering what's the point of this is at all. Aside from the Ultimate fiasco, what's the point in not supporting a home version of an unified OS with patches?

     

    Patches made for Business/Pro will work on the Home version. They are completely identical, aside from the fact that some network features and security features are turned off in the home versions (turned off, but still included)

     

    It's notable that MS never ceased to support a home version of an unified OS. The XP home versions have now the same extended support like the Pro versions. And it's obvious why: Patches for XP Pro work for Home, so the only way to disadvantage the Home versions would be by blocking newer XP patches from WU for Home versions. That would only lead to bad press (MS is artificially blocking already developed patches!) and make the internet more insecure.

     

    Microsoft should just stop the charade, and admit that the Home versions of unified operating systems will get the same extended support (at least the patches).

     

    The people and the press can understand if an old system will not get patches, but they will not understand the policy of witholding developed, working patches just because of the business/consumer definition. And XP shows that MS doesn't have the balls to really enforce the policy. So stop the charade.

    Stepping back a level seems to explain it all well enough.

     

    http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/

     

    Of note, is that there is a new service pack support policy.

  • The 2010 Laptop Thread

    ScottWelker said:
    elmer said:
    *snip*

    HP is on the label regardless of whether it is their consumer or business product.

    It almost sounds as though you are arguing that it's OK for HP to sell poor products that they won't stand behind as long as they are "consumer products".

    I wouldn’t touch anything you see on the “Home & Home Office” section of their website... at least not until I see more evidence that HP have changed their approach to the consumer market.

     

    What part of that is not clear ??

     

    I am certainly NOT supporting HP and/or their short-sighted approach to the consumer market.

     

    Yes, HP do still have solid products in their business range, but the poor quality of their consumer products is damaging their reputation. Most consumers will only ever be exposed to HP's flakey consumer products, and it's unavoidable that their widespread dissatisfaction will impact on the business market that HP sees as their "real" focus.

     

    What HP don't seem to get about the consumer market, is the significance of the investment relative to income.

     

    Their cavalier attitude of "you get what you pay for" might be acceptable to an IT manager of an SMB or larger, trying to see if they can get away with buying cheaper, but if you are a consumer, and it breaks, it's a major loss, and you are not in the same position of being able to just write it off as "oh well, it was worth a try" and buy a replacement.

  • Hell freezes over... Opera approved for iPhone

    http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2010/04/13/

  • wait a moment.. KIN IS ROCK!!!

    I've got the advertising campaign...

     

    ...queue music...

     

    ...Kinfolk said "Jed move away from there"
    Said "Californy is the place you ought to be"
    So they loaded up the truck and moved to Beverly.

  • Security Essentials - Disable scan on startup

    blowdart said:

    Hmm that's weird, it doesn't do that on my laptop. Are you sure it's not doing a catchup scan because your PC was off when the scheduled scan was due to start?

    No, the computer is normally on 24/7 - so fortunately it's only an issue for maintenance times... but it's frustrating. I wanted to upgrade the BIOS this moring, and Intel's BIOS upgrader always fails on the first attempt, needing a second try... what should have been a 5min job turned into a 30min saga... with me seconds away from addressing the issue with a large hammer. I managed to click on the security essentials tray icon and switched it off... which it then duly ignored... but the instant the display finally went RED to acknowledge my choice, the computer came back to life... which suggests to me that it's the scanner.