Windows 8 - Deeper Impressions

[jaclaz]

The reason is that the collectors spend so much time downloading and processing that it greatly cuts into entertainment time. I think a pathology is involved and that these people would be unlikely to translate into significant recovered sales. I think collectors are more interested in bragging about the state of their collection rather than consuming the content.

Again OT , I have found a very similar syndrome in otherwise very good guys when it come to two subjects:

1. unattended install
   
2. multi-boot USB sticks with Linux idistro's
   

1)

I am currently running a machine to which I installed XP in 2007 or 2008, all the other machine I have/deal with at home and at office (more or less 15) are running NT 4.0, 2K or XP, NONE of them have ever been re-installed, exception made for one (replaced motherboard).

If you assume that 45 minutes is a "reasonable" time to install a MS OS like those, I have totaled around 12 hours installing all of them over the years (and not "full attention" time, I just had to keep an eye on the machine while doing something else, allowing to have a walk, or take a coffe in the meantime), and let's double that to take into account the "base" apps that I install anyway.

If you have a look at the forum most of the people "fighting" with "unattended" installs spend tenfold that time to get a "perfect unattended" with such "refinements" as custom coloured setup billboards (which BTW, if it is actually "unattended" noone will see) and possibly sophisticated and including each and every driver, etc., etc..

Now a minority actually have used this "perfect unattended" CD/DVD to install hundreds or thousands of times (because they work in a Computer Shop or are IT and deal with a large number of machines) , but I suspect that the majority have used it ony a handful of times or simply re-installed over and over routinely as a ("wrong" BTW) "maintenance step".

2)

When it comes to bootable USB sticks, I am very perplexed by the number of people that have (or want to have) any completely senseless number of Linux distro's on it. The good thing about the Linux OS is that it is perfectly and fully customizable (in a much easier way than MS OS are, obviously) from an "exactly same" core, and since there is this possibility what does a lot of people do?

Add more and more distro's (which apart some graphical effects/looks) contain exactly the same programs.

To me it is logical to try (one by one) a few distro's, then choose one and use that one ONLY the I fancy, learning little by little to use it at it's full potential, adding/changing a few specific programs, removing others that I don't use, etc., i.e. exactly what I have always done with MS OSes.

A lot of people fall instead in what I call "collector's frenzy", the desire to add to a bootable stick each and every distro (which again contain more or less exactly the same tools under a different "skin") and never learn to use in "advanced mode" any of them.

I suspect that somewhere there are (underground) meetings where these peeps boast the number of distro's they manage to assemble into a single USB stick and that they never used after the initial booting and desktop appearing.

jaclaz

[HalloweenDocument12]

I am guilty of the "unattended install" syndrome, though I think you mean to expand it to the entire 3rd party ecosystem (e.g. AutoPatcher, DriverPacks, etc.). I have dealt with over a thousand installs, ranging from individual to ~100 seat deployments. For me it's trying to figure out the balance, and it is a moving target. The problem is that it seems like it would be 45 minutes, but it really isn't. Sure you can get to some sort of desktop in that amount of time, but then there are the updates, drivers, applications, data, etc. For myself, I allocate an eight hour block and figure that I'll only be about halfway done, with the other half being done gradually over a period of months as circumstances arise.

I used to do this professionally, and my boss wanted me to just reformat every computer I came across because he thought that was a way of getting out in under an hour, but it ended up being my last resort as it was usually faster to find out what the specific issue was and address that, even if it took 2-3 hours. Most don't seem to understand just how long it takes to restore someone's computer to the way he wants it, and how prepared one needs to be upfront to minimize lost time. The "45 minutes" figure comes up a lot, but if you do installs that way you'll never get called again. After a while, I got very good at manual virus removals, which was the #1 issue, and didn't need to wait for long scans anymore, which were often defeated by the viruses, anyway.

[ciHnoN]

In Microsoft's wonderland, there are no options. Only rabbits.

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

The XboxFiles continue! ...

Next Xbox rumored to be 'expensive' at launch ( NeoWin 2013-04-06 )

Microsoft to unveil next Xbox May 21, subsidized version for $300? ( TechSpot 2013-04-08 )

Report: Microsoft's April Xbox Event Pushed to May 21 ( Tom's Hardware 2013-04-08 )

Microsoft pushed back next Xbox reveal because it's not afraid of PS4? ( NeoWin 2013-04-08 )

The rumor mill is buzzing once again, and this time it is over the price of the Xbox, supposedly in the $500 range, possibly more expensive than the next Sony. This story originates from Thurrott ( see next ), and was his big scoop until it was interrupted by the Xbox #DealWithIt controversy.

UPDATE: note that the story has expanded to cover the changed date of the Xbox reveal. What is funny is the spin that NeoWin and MicroZealots are trying to put on it - that Microsoft changed the date because it looked at the Sony news and decided, "hmmm, no competition, we can take our time". It never occurs to them that Microsoft might actually be backtracking now, halting or postponing the "always-on" requirement.

Xbox v.Next and Always On(line) ( Thurrott 2013-04-07 )

Paul is off his biploar meds again. Actually he is just ticked off that his scoop on the price was washed away by that tsunami of controversy around Adam Orth ...

The Internet—or at least a certain part of the Internet—reacted with outrage, despite the fact that most of the complaints were likely made over high-speed cable connections.

Wait, what? Maybe they should have wrote snail-mail letters? Folks who use broadband should shut up? That's one huge Olympic sized long jump he just made there. Gold medal.

He could have been more tactful, but let’s face it, people are way too sensitive online.

As opposed to being offline? As opposed to being insensitive? What does this mean? Paul, this is righteous indignation you are seeing, and by now you as a supreme shill for the MicroBorg should be completely used to it. That means you are just making this stuff up as you go along now. Fine, keep enabling Microsoft's public suicide.

The biggest issue here, frankly, was the cyberbullying that occurred in the wake of Orth’s comments. Those sensitive people aren’t so sensitive when it comes to other people, that’s for sure. In fact, that’s my exact definition of a bully.

This one is particularly sickening to me. Cyberbullying, or any bullying has one key component, and that is an innocent victim. Such victims do not deserve the heat the receive. Adam Orth is not innocent, nor a victim. He is a self-identified Softie, and a bigwig too. He is on a huge public forum, Twitter. He is talking to a representative of another company. Thurrott is taking a giant crap on all actual innocent victims everywhere by trying to protect this Softie from any consequences for his arrogance and own big mouth.

And there it would have sat. I never would have written this up, because I can’t stand this sort of pseudo-outrage.

Pseudo-outrage. That Microsoft patented arrogant insular thinking is really rubbing off onto the fanboys. It's stunning. There is nothing pseudo about this or any of the other outrage, particularly that over Windows 8. They call them Apple trolls, Google, Linux, phonies, and now "pseudo". In short, call them anything except for what they really are, customers. That sound you have been hearing for TWO YEARS now is a bonafide uproar from the Microsoft and Windows loyalists. That's why it is so loud, so persistent, and so righteous.

More to the point, I think that an always-on Xbox is directly in keeping with Microsoft’s strategy for all next-generation platforms, including Windows Phone (all versions) and Windows 8/RT, which are designed to work as if you are simply connected all the time.

Did he just actually use a cellphone as a comparative example of a device that expects "always-on" to rationalize their crazy Xbox strategy? Man, they must be paying him some serious money to put that sentence together with a straight face.

But the knee-jerk reaction to this functionality—which, again, could certainly have been communicated a bit better—is happening before we have all the facts. Let’s see what Microsoft has to say about the next Xbox, first in a late May launch event, and then later at both E3 and BUILD 2013, before we make up our minds. Let’s not let one ill-conceived comment ruin what’s going to be an awesome year for Xbox. And yes, it really is going to be awesome.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Wait until it is done and released. Wouldn't that be convenient for Microsoft. That's what they're hoping for. That's what they're counting on. And they expect their enablers to aid them by doing exactly what Thurrott is doing here. Up the dosage Paul. The current prescription is not cutting it.

See, what actually happened here is that Thurrott got caught flat-footed by this story. He was off doing something else, having already pre-recorded a segment about the Xbox before this story broke. So he had no choice but to cut short his vacation and write something, and this is the result. It is clearly "phoned in". Compounding the problem I believe is that Thurrott probably realizes that criticism of all of Microsoft's crazy strategies are reaching critical mass now, from all segments of customers about all of their key products and he is running out of energy defending them. That's how this post reads to me. The commenters beneath this article are another story altogether.

EDIT: added link(s)

Edited April 9, 2013 by CharlotteTheHarlot

[jaclaz]

In Microsoft's wonderland, there are no options. Only rabbits.

Well, you shouldn't post here just links to your site, and particularly your approach seems offensive towards rabbits

Bunnies are cool. B)

And they have NO copy protection (results in cloning may vary, though )

jaclaz

[Formfiller]

I get the feeling MS wants to make it into the Guinness book of records. "Fastest loss of marketshare by a multi-billion dollar company".

Any other explanations? They seem to be genuinely ecstatic about p***ing-off as much customers and developers are possible.

"I heard these Xbox kiddies are the most ardent defenders of our metro strategy in public forums.. that's unacceptable, we need to annoy them somehow too".

[JorgeA]

To me it is logical to try (one by one) a few distro's, then choose one and use that one ONLY the I fancy, learning little by little to use it at it's full potential, adding/changing a few specific programs, removing others that I don't use, etc., i.e. exactly what I have always done with MS OSes.

My "ideal" Linux distro would be one that combines the Windows look-and-feel of Zorin OS with the stunning graphics of Netrunner. Every other distro I've tried features what I can only describe as "powdery" or "grainy" visuals (n the start menu, wallpaper, windows borders, application menus, etc.). I'm not sure what the proper term for it is, or what causes it, but it's the best that I can come up with to indicate what I mean.

From the little I know of Linux in my limited explorations of it, it will probably be easier to give Netrunner a Windows-type start menu, than to give to Zorin OS (or any other Linux I've seen) those sharp graphics. But I'm willing to be corrected!

--JorgeA

[Formfiller]

Thurrott:

http://winsupersite.com/xbox/xbox-vnext-and-always-online

Two comments about this that I posted to Twitter but will add to the public record here:

1) Today, an Xbox 360 that is not connected to the Internet is absolutely worthless to me. So the notion of a new Xbox that requires a connection is not just not problematic, it's to be expected. It's not 1979.

2) The Roku and other similar set-top boxes also require an always-on Internet connection. There's no outrage about that, as there shouldn't be.

Just a (couple of) thought(s).

What a p***-poor reasoning, he isn't even trying anymore. Most people pop up a DVD into the console and play. It doesn't become "worthless" with no connection, just some additional features (like online-play) aren't available.

The bit about Roku is over-the-top retarded. A settop box needs per definition a provider. Just like a phone. Devices like phones and set-top-boxes can't provide the function that they are built for without a connection. Laws of physics.

They are desperately trying to mix two completely different things: Additional features versus requirement.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Formfiller

[Formfiller]

Another one of these masochists on Thurrott's site:

People are so upset that "always online" could possibly be only for the purpose of DRM. Because of this, we finally know just how many people pirate games, and we can pinpoint specific people who are upset about DRM as likely pirates. If we can end game piracy by way of always-online experience, then maybe games will be sold with 5 licenses by default.

Airtight logic. And everyone opposed to surveillance drones entering your house at will is a terrorist and should be sent to a re-eduction camp before he plants a bomb.

"I've had to read a book for school called "1980" or something, and it was totally cool. No one is alone there, because his friends monitor him everytime through TV! LOL! I wish my TV could do that. They all speak a cool language "NewsSpeak", I like it, because it's so short and so easy! You don't have to write much to express feelings'stuff with it. Can't wait 'til all becomes reality! See ya!"

Edited April 8, 2013 by Formfiller

[JorgeA]

Xbox v.Next and Always On(line) ( Thurrott 2013-04-07 )

Paul is off his biploar meds again.

You may be more right than you think (in general if not in this particular case). I've been away for a few days, which gave me time to ponder some of these issues somewhat more detachedly. While thinking about it, and now reading about these incredible "why would I live there" and "we must all be connected all the time" comments, it strikes me that Thurrott, Adam Orth and other proponents of this stuff just don't have the wiring to get it. They seem to be incapable of understanding how or why anybody would want to lead their life differently, and specifically in a way that doesn't involve dependence on and deference to The Center.

It's almost like a mental illness, or at best a dark aspect of the human character that has come to the surface (so to speak) in the neowinnies and mstards of the world. More than simply accepting it, they welcome and even prefer to be monitored, watched, tethered, given a pre-made environment, told what to do -- and they actually feel insulted ("you're Luddites," etc.) when someone dares to suggest it might be better to lead your own independent life and to tailor your immediate environment to your own requirements. It's as if deep inside they want to feel part of some giant collective abstraction and gleefully give up their freedom and individuality for the sake of participating in it.

Shall we call them...

Borg drones

(source)

(source)

"Resistance is futile! You will be assimilated!"

Each Borg individual, or drone, is linked to the collective by a sophisticated subspace network that ensures each member is given constant supervision and guidance.

--Giorgos of MYOFB

[Formfiller]

Well, the "Singularity" is very popular with the IT-Elite apparently. Maybe that's an additional reason why all this always-connected stuff is getting so promoted.

In case you don't know what's about:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/books/You-Are-Not-a-Gadget_excerpt.pdf

The Singularity is an apocalyptic idea originally proposed by John von

Neumann, one of the inventors of digital computation, and elucidated by

figures such as Vernor Vinge and Ray Kurzweil.

There are many versions of the fantasy of the Singularity. Here’s the

one Marvin Minsky used to tell over the dinner table in the early 1980s:

One day soon, maybe twenty or thirty years into the twenty- first century,

computers and robots will be able to construct copies of themselves, and

these copies will be a little better than the originals because of intelligent

software. The second generation of robots will then make a third,

but it will take less time, because of the improvements over the first

generation.

The process will repeat. Successive generations will be ever smarter

and will appear ever faster. People might think they’re in control, until

one fine day the rate of robot improvement ramps up so quickly that

superintelligent robots will suddenly rule the Earth.

In some versions of the story, the robots are imagined to be microscopic,

forming a “gray goo” that eats the Earth; or else the internet itself

comes alive and rallies all the net- connected machines into an army to

control the affairs of the planet. Humans might then enjoy immortality

within virtual reality, because the global brain would be so huge that it

would be absolutely easy—a no- brainer, if you will—for it to host all our

consciousnesses for eternity.

The coming Singularity is a popular belief in the society of technologists.

Singularity books are as common in a computer science department

as Rapture images are in an evangelical bookstore.

From "You're Not a Gadget" by Jaron Lannier.

So basically this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeboqg4t9vs

(contains Deus Ex 2 spoilers)

Edited April 8, 2013 by Formfiller

[HalloweenDocument12]

The biggest issue here, frankly, was the cyberbullying that occurred in the wake of Orth’s comments. Those sensitive people aren’t so sensitive when it comes to other people, that’s for sure. In fact, that’s my exact definition of a bully.

This one is particularly sickening to me. Cyberbullying, or any bullying has one key component, and that is an innocent victim. Such victims do not deserve the heat the receive. Adam Orth is not innocent, nor a victim. He is a self-identified Softie, and a bigwig too. He is on a huge public forum, Twitter. He is talking to a representative of another company. Thurrott is taking a giant crap on all actual innocent victims everywhere by trying to protect this Softie from any consequences for his arrogance and own big mouth.

Not sure if you're aware of this, but there's this anti-bullying "thing" going on online at the moment. It started earnestly in response to high-profile suicides due to things like Facebook harassment but has been co-opted and corrupted into what amounts into a tool to chill arguments. The gist is that party X can make the most inflammatory remark and that if he receives more than a few counterarguments then he is being "bullied". One would think it pretty clear that X is, in fact, the aggressor, but "victim culture" (a related concept) twists the response into an emotional appeal to distract from the invalidity of the original argument. As in the above example, the emotional appeal will almost certainly contain platitudes with charged language. Similar concepts include "safe space", or the appeal that people should be shielded from all criticism and negativity and "privilege", or the idea that whoever is making the counterargument is in a position of strength by invalid means and cannot argue in good faith due to his ill-gotten superior position. "Safe space" and "privilege" originated in the LGBT and feminist communities but are now being used in general argumentation. When combining all these "tools" it allows one to establish a position of advocacy yet shield himself from any criticism.

Skepticism, critical thinking, and evidence gathering are the sworn enemies of the above concepts.

[jaclaz]

Possibly related :

Why Tech Projects Fail: 5 Unspoken Reasons

http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/why-tech-projects-fail-5-unspoken-reason/240152282?pgno=1

....

In most companies, determining the potential costs and benefits of a tech investment is neither art nor science. Rather, it's an elaborate and often dishonest marketing exercise (upward and outward-facing) aimed at persuading senior stakeholders that one HIPPO should win out.

.....

At my previous employer, a large financial institution that has gone belly up, I attended a great many senior management off-sites. One particular exchange with a senior exec has haunted me for more than a decade. During a breakout session, a midlevel manager asked what he should do if he were competing with his internal peers for funding when he knew that their functions and ideas were more important to the bank. The answer from the senior exec: Treat your role as the most important and do everything you can to win that funding fight. In other words, putting yourself first is in the best interests of the company.

The unintended consequence of this kind of thinking was the financial community's spectacular collapse. The unintended consequence in IT -- and this isn't unique to my former employer -- is that project funding more often goes to mildly technical marketers and shameless salespeople, not to hardcore engineers and scientists who let the data drive.

Rare is the executive who puts the company's interests before his or her own (financial stability, career progression, personal brand building). And that kind of behavior isn't exclusive to executives; it's pervasive from the boardroom to the mailroom.

....

jaclaz

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Not sure if you're aware of this, but there's this anti-bullying "thing" going on online at the moment. It started earnestly in response to high-profile suicides due to things like Facebook harassment but has been co-opted and corrupted into what amounts into a tool to chill arguments. The gist is that party X can make the most inflammatory remark and that if he receives more than a few counterarguments then he is being "bullied". One would think it pretty clear that X is, in fact, the aggressor, but "victim culture" (a related concept) twists the response into an emotional appeal to distract from the invalidity of the original argument. As in the above example, the emotional appeal will almost certainly contain platitudes with charged language. Similar concepts include "safe space", or the appeal that people should be shielded from all criticism and negativity and "privilege", or the idea that whoever is making the counterargument is in a position of strength by invalid means and cannot argue in good faith due to his ill-gotten superior position. "Safe space" and "privilege" originated in the LGBT and feminist communities but are now being used in general argumentation. When combining all these "tools" it allows one to establish a position of advocacy yet shield himself from any criticism.

Skepticism, critical thinking, and evidence gathering are the sworn enemies of the above concepts.

Exactly why that Thurrott argument is distasteful to me. Last refuge of a scoundrel.

[HalloweenDocument12]

2) The Roku and other similar set-top boxes also require an always-on Internet connection. There's no outrage about that, as there shouldn't be.

Not strictly true. The XS model allows local streaming. That said, it's probably not as good of a solution compared to, say, a PlayStation 3. On the other hand, Roku costs $85 for the premium model and $50 for the standard so it's not quite the same thing compared to a $500 video game console.