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


jinx101 jinx101
  • www.​channel9.​club (beta live) :)

    I didn't signup but looked through the pages and the sites created (all still stock currently).  I like the design, also a creative use of WordPress (I use WordPress as a CMS quite a bit and intermingle it with .net). 

  • does channel 9 need a new look / site?

    , spivonious wrote

    Responsive design would be nice.

    +1.  Aside from that the site still works well for me.

  • Windows 10 for Windows Phones

    , Proton2 wrote


    In two years WP7 will no longer be supported. Even now you can no longer developer unlock a WP7 device.

    It might as well not have not been supported two years ago.  Microsoft may have been patching issues but if those patches never get pushed out by the telecoms the end result is the same.

  • HoloLens

    His twitter account still seems active.  I can't follow whatever he or the bot is posting in various threads.  It sounds like mad ramblings.  Some of his posts have truncated text from some of his other posts.  Very odd.

  • "I think we can declare that Microsoft’s Windows RT experiment is officially dead."

    , elmer wrote

    Looks like Windows-RT devices (effectively the Surface-RT) get the same treatment as the Windows-Phone 7.8 retirement package, and a wipe of the hands.

    You bought one of those things? Too bad, so sad...

    I didn't even get that with my WP7.  I got stuck on 7.5 and I couldn't even get the 7.8 update even though my phone supported it.  I still have a bitter taste over that one. 

  • Windows 10 - The next chapter

    Scott Hansleman also posted about that.  He basically said it' your license but you have to get it in the first year and it's yours to keep.  If you don't claim it in a year you would have to buy it.

    I suspect they'll get a lot of people who have been hanging on to upgrade with that and though they don't get the initial dollars it may serve to keep people in the ecosystem and about face the ship (looking at Windows as a conduit to other monetizing Microsoft services). 

    It could all be media fluff but I'm just happy to see Microsoft moving in the right direction (I'm also glad on a side note that Visual Studio has seen leaps in bounds in it's last few versions and has largely held onto it's ease of use).

  • HoloLens

    Pretty cool, a lot of potential with it.  We'll see if Microsoft can figure out what Google hasn't (yet).  Thinking about something like this integrating with the Xbox is pretty sweet if that were on the agenda.

  • Google = low-class scum

    , blowdart wrote


    Who would sue them? You don't want to stop people reporting the bugs.

    Anyone who incurs a loss as a result of Google giving thieves exploits that make their systems vulnerable.  Hypothetically let's say they put the exploit out there and 100,000 people's personal information gets compromised that wouldn't have happened if they didn't publish the bug publically.  I get that they're trying to shame Microsoft (and whoever else) into fixing bugs faster but they setup the scenario for real consequences against average users.


    , fanbaby wrote

    I'm not sure... Google's policy is 90 days for all, and msft said it needed 2 more days...

    They can make anything their policy, it doesn't make it right.  They are taking the action to publish information that puts consumers at risk.  Their end goal wanting the bugs fixed faster is a fine end goal, but putting people in harms way to get there is wrong (IMO).  I don't care how bad Microsoft's code is our how slow they are at fixing bugs.

  • Google = low-class scum


    Looks like they did it again.  Seems like they're saying their motivation is "security" and to get Microsoft (or whoever) to patch faster but in reality they're just putting users (and many also users of their products) at risk.  For a company that's motto is "do no evil" it seems giving malicious blue prints away to those that would/could use them for nefarious purposes is pretty awful.

    I wonder if they would have any liability for the damages caused by malicious code exploiting this as a result of them releasing it.

  • More proof MS technologies are on the way out...

    , BitFlipper wrote

    But for some reason, when MS does it, it turns into a "battery issue". And the API must prevent you from, god forbid, you want to actually use that powerful hardware you paid for to its full potential.

    I'm with you on this one.  It's that whole "you'll use this only as we say we'll use it, we know better than you and we will dictate the experience" attitude.  If I want to use a battery/CPU intensive process I should be able to do it. :P  If it uses too much battery I can *dramatic music*... plug the device into the wall.  If I'm someplace that doesn't have power then I planned poorly.