JorgeA

Windows 8 - Deeper Impressions

6,162 posts in this topic

In other news.... UEFI vulnerability found in Windows 8:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/19/win8_rootkit/

To be fair :w00t: , it is a UEFI vulnerability, a similar one already found and published for MAC's by some good guys from down under.

Unsurprisingly, freedom vs. security imply some trade off's:

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/09/22/protecting-the-pre-os-environment-with-uefi.aspx

http://www.itsec.it/2012/09/18/uefi-technology-say-hello-to-the-windows-8-bootkit/

How to protect Systems? Some words about the new Microsoft Secureboot technology are required. SecureBoot is a brand-new Microsoft Security feature that, in cooperation with Intel and OEM Firmware producers, digital signs even the main Boot EFI Loader. Firmware has a digitally signed catalog of recognized Boot loaders SHA hashes. If startup EFI Application is not digitally signed, or if it has been changed, EFI Firmware refuse to boot. This fact obviously will increase whole platform’s security, though the biggest drawback is that it will render entire architecture closer, decreasing user freedom’s of choice. Anyway, the discussion whether or not SecureBoot is the right technology is outside the scope of current analysis

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how Windows users will ultimately be dragged into Metro-land: make previous versions of Windows able to do less and less.

If you're on XP, you can (I suppose) switch to a different browser, but there are tons of "default" users out there who aren't aware that they can do that, and wouldn't know how to do it anyway. That's how they can pronounce a new sh*tty interface a "success." And in any case, resisting the upgrade treadmill is getting harder and harder to do, as all sorts of inter-related software keeps pushing you to the latest and worst greatest. Norton security products, for example, no longer support earlier versions of Firefox, so as a user I'm forced to choose between losing the Norton browser toolbar or switching to the current Firefox version.

Increasingly, the Information Superhighway is constructed such that your current car will no longer run on it and you have to keep getting new cars. :realmad:

--JorgeA

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how Windows users will ultimately be dragged into Metro-land: make previous versions of Windows able to do less and less.

Well, this has actually nothing to do with WIndows 8 (i.e. it's collateral damage) it is evident how the idea is to push Chrome.

And as well, the good thing is as always freedom :thumbup I cannot imagine how much should Symantec pay me :w00t: to install any of their bloated crapware on any of my machines, as an example :whistle: .

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Microsoft software takes another step toward the feudal model (you pay rent to the cyberlords in perpetuity).

With the addition of subscription-based pricing for Office 2013, Microsoft is aggressively pushing its Office customers to get out of the traditional software business and begin paying subscription fees.

To do that, it’s using a classic “carrot and stick” approach.

The first stick is the sticker shock you’ll get if you price out the “traditional” boxed versions of Microsoft Office. For Office 2013, those prices are up a minimum of 10% and as much as 17% per copy.

But the hurt is magnified if you want to install Office on multiple PCs. Office 2013 will offer no multi-copy discounts for traditional packaged software as Office 2010 does.

If you want to run Office 2010 Home & Business on a desktop and a notebook, you can buy a discounted two-pack license for $280. A similar two-PC deal is available for Office 2010 Professional at $500.

For Office 2013, you have to buy two separate licenses, at a total cost of $440 and $800, or an increase of 57% and 60%, respectively.

Note that, despite the additional hit, if you tend to use your software for longer periods, then it's still a better deal to buy it outright. For example, using Office for six years (I used Office 2000 through the end of 2008) brings the yearly cost of the license (vs. a $100 yearly subscription) to less than $75.

That is, unless they render the software practically unusable, as discussed in my previous post above.

--JorgeA

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how Windows users will ultimately be dragged into Metro-land: make previous versions of Windows able to do less and less.

Well, this has actually nothing to do with WIndows 8 (i.e. it's collateral damage) it is evident how the idea is to push Chrome.

Collateral damage is right. I don't think that (in this case) there is a general plan to push people off XP and onto a newer OS, but that's the effect. Assimilate or suffer the consequences. And within a few weeks, any regular PC user who finally gets pushed off XP and buys a new computer, chances are it'll have Windows 8 on it.

--JorgeA

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On UNrelated news it seems like the good guys at MS made a little techical error :w00t: thus failing to comply with the EU ruling :

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-18/microsoft-said-to-face-eu-antitrust-complaint-on-browser-choice.html

(it is defined as "little" as it seemingly affecs/affected "only" 28 millions OEM PC's ;) )

AND, a similar matter is "in the air" for the new Windows 8:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-20/eu-may-probe-microsoft-for-tablet-software-almunia-says.html

AND the waters are not so calm for the good guys at Google, either:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/sep/21/google-warned-antitrust-charges-europe?newsfeed=true

:ph34r:

Be aware that there is a concrete risk (if the trend goes like this) that you can get an EU fine of (say) 15 Euro's because you used the sentence:

Oww, come on, google for it...

instead of the correct:

You should access an online search engine and perform a search for that ...

OOT (Off-Off-Topic):

Anyone ever read or heard the sentence :unsure: :

Oww, come on, bing for it ....

:angel

:lol:

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the news items, jaclaz. Couldn't be happening to a nicer bunch of folks...

Be aware that there is a concrete risk (if the trend goes like this) that you can get an EU fine of (say) 15 Euro's because you used the sentence:

Oww, come on, google for it...

instead of the correct:

You should access an online search engine and perform a search for that ...

Sure, not a problem. I want to distribute this warning to my family and neighbors. I just sneezed, so let me just get a *leenex to blow my nose first, and then I'll ?erox the printout. ;)

The price of enormous success is that your brand becomes part of the language, a new name for the product itself. Should be a cause for satisfaction, not alarm.

OOT (Off-Off-Topic):

Anyone ever read or heard the sentence :unsure: :

Oww, come on, bing for it ....

:angel

:lol:

:D

--JorgeA

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 different interfaces, 3 clear choices. Which appeals to you? And which appeals to your child?

efbJ5.jpg

( Image source: Nokia )

Walking into a hypothetical store that stocks, sells and displays all three, and disregarding contracts with everything else being equal, I would have to say that I would be walking out with the Galaxy. The wife would be grabbing an iPhone no doubt, and the kids would be all over the playskool model. That pretty much sums it up as far as their highly polished appearances. And it probably reflects the gender-demographic divide as well. YMMV.

Of course I would be grabbing the Android just so I could quickly change that horrific dandelion screen to something else ( where I am, they are considered weeds which are just slightly less despised than Poison Ivy ). I would rather poke my eyes out than watch another dandelion blow around. :lol:

I think Apple might have missed the boat a little by not sufficiently distinguishing the appearance from their previous two models, both in iOS6 and the handset itself. Looks like they mailed it in this time.

The Windows Phone is just terrible IMHO. If the yellow isn't bad enough, what were they thinking with the text color? That thing is just screaming for black text. Nokia dummies! That is the absolute epitome of horrible theme design. Does it ship with bifocals? I despise the icons also.

What does everyone else think?

EDIT: typo

Edited by CharlotteTheHarlot
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

The Windows Phone is just terrible IMHO. If the yellow isn't bad enough, what were they thinking with the text color? That thing is just screaming for black text. Nokia dummies! That is the absolute epitome of horrible theme design. Does it ship with bifocals? I despise the icons also.

What does everyone else think?

Stop ragging on Microsoft. Don't you KNOW that their highly paid Professional Experts have metrics and focus groups and crystal balls to support their design choices?? Shame on you, you hater...

--JorgeA

P.S. I've always kind of liked the look of the iPhone screen, with the icons that appear to be floating in the air. Like a "legacy" :rolleyes: Windows desktop.

But then, I'd much rather have "a phone that's just a phone." Life is complicated enough as it is, to have to deal with yet another gadget that needs care and nurturing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does everyone else think?

The WP8 phone is beyond awful, much like Windows 8 :puke: I'd sooner pay more for an Android phone even if out of the 3 I prefer the iPhone.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From everything I've seen and heard, the Android phone is comparable to Linux, ie more flexible and powerful but it can get complicated to use so it's a power user phone, while the iPhone is like a Mac, it just works, even your grandmother can learn to operate it. The Windows phone looks like a toy, but it's market share is so small that it really doesn't matter.

The Android vs iPhone comparison has been reinforced to me twice lately. Once was at a dealer where my wife asked which phone they would recommend, and they said the iPhone for ease of use. I asked "What about the Galaxy S III?" The salesman agreed that was the phone he wanted, but he still recommends the iPhone if asked, even though it was lower priced and he got a slightly lower commission because of that. My wife got the iPhone. Then tonight we were talking with a friend of ours who is the IT guy for a small local company and is in charge of supporting the smart phones used by their employees. He personally loves his Galaxy S III and has it unlocked, overclocked, and tweaked like crazy, but he prefers the employees who are not as technical to have an iPhone because they are less likely to "mess it up" so it makes his job easier.

Cheers and Regards

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It just gets harder and harder to understand how Microsoft expects Windows RT (and Win8) tablets to succeed in the marketplace.

If, like me, you thought Microsoft would price Windows RT competitively, you were wrong: A leaked slide from Asus says that its Vivo Tab RT, due to be released alongside Windows RT at the end of October, will start at $600. Unbelievably, this is $100 more than the iPad 3, and a full $200 more than the iPad 2 or Galaxy Tab 2 10.1.

For $600, you would expect some sensational hardware specs — but alas, that’s sadly not the case. The Vivo Tab RT has a low-res 10.1-inch 1366×768 IPS display, quad-core Tegra 3 SoC, 2GB of RAM, NFC, 8-megapixel camera… and that’s about it. Like its Androidesque cousin, the Transformer, the Vivo Tab RT can be plugged into a keyboard/battery dock — but it’ll cost you another $200 for the pleasure. (Curiously, the Transformer’s docking station only costs $150 — go figure.)

What could possibly be the reason for the Vivo Tab’s extortionate price tag? Windows RT of course. Back in May we reported that OEMs were struggling to produce tablets that competed with the iPad on price, and then in June multiple OEMs said that Microsoft was charging between $80 and $95 for a Windows RT license.

This price is certainly in line with what Microsoft usually charges for an operating system license, but in this case — with Microsoft desperately trying to break into the tablet market — we thought the Redmond company would relax the “Windows Tax.” Unfortunately, Microsoft seems intent on collecting its pound of flesh, even if it results in Windows RT tablets that are completely priced out of the market, and thus failing dismally.

Are they expecting hordes of Microsoft fanatics to line up on October 25, credit cards in hand, for their RT's at the three dozen or so Microsoft Stores on the planet?

--JorgeA

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 different interfaces, 3 clear choices. Which appeals to you? And which appeals to your child?

efbJ5.jpg

( Image source: Nokia )

Walking into a hypothetical store that stocks, sells and displays all three, and disregarding contracts with everything else being equal, I would have to say that I would be walking out with the Galaxy. The wife would be grabbing an iPhone no doubt, and the kids would be all over the playskool model. That pretty much sums it up as far as their highly polished appearances. And it probably reflects the gender-demographic divide as well. YMMV.

Of course I would be grabbing the Android just so I could quickly change that horrific dandelion screen to something else ( where I am, they are considered weeds which are just slightly less despised than Poison Ivy ). I would rather poke my eyes out than watch another dandelion blow around. :lol:

I think Apple might have missed the boot a little by not sufficiently distinguishing the appearance from their previous two models, both in iOS6 and the handset itself. Looks like they mailed it in this time.

The Windows Phone is just terrible IMHO. If the yellow isn't bad enough, what were they thinking with the text color? That thing is just screaming for black text. Nokia dummies! That is the absolute epitome of horrible theme design. Does it ship with bifocals? I despise the icons also.

What does everyone else think?

Definitely, Samsung S III. Apple is for kids 8 to 12 and Nokia is for kids 3 to 5 years old. :thumbup

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if it just Tegra-3-SoC,

the incoming "Ouya" would much cheaper and its promised to be open architecture too.

Review from PC World: http://www.pcworld.com/article/259121/why_ouya_is_making_a_killing_on_kickstarter.html

Interview with Engadget: http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/17/interview-ouya-ceo-julie-uhrman/

Though this one not technically a tablet or phone ... I found this better than that $600 RT deals.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely, Samsung S III. Apple is for kids 8 to 12 and Nokia is for kids 3 to 5 years old. :thumbup

agree :thumbup This Metro Design is absolutely ugly

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.