[jaclaz]

For NO apparent reason :
http://www.imdb.com/...es?qt=qt0373704

jaclaz

[CoffeeFiend]

JorgeA, on 15 December 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

if (say) Microsoft goes rogue and starts charging extortionate prices to use its Office 365 service, or demanding onerous conditions for me to access my Office files, I am SOL. If the website that kept all my songs and movies and photos suddenly goes 404, I am SOL.

Yep. That's a common problem with everything that relies on web services or websites. Over time, companies change their terms of service and pricing (like Google who's doing just that for Google apps currently), they often remove features (like Google did recently with their "cloud" sync), there's the problems of independent "cloud" providers and websites "going 404" indeed, there's the problems of companies changing their online APIs requiring constant updates to your apps so they keep working (or sometimes they limit usage a lot like twitter recently, or they start to charge for it like Google Maps did), things like MS locking all your online accounts due to storing a photo on skydrive that might have looked kinda similar to something illegal, there's the worries that some companies might have a little too much information about you than what you like, and with all the recent identity theft and account/credit card numbers leaked or stolen, I'm not to keen on everyone having those infos.

In related news:
MIT professor: Windows 8 is a Christmas gift for 'someone you hate'
and
Is Windows 8’s Lack of Windows a Mistake?

[jaclaz]

CoffeeFiend, on 16 December 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

In related news:
MIT professor: Windows 8 is a Christmas gift for 'someone you hate'

From the linked to:
http://blogs.law.har...hate-windows-8/
I find this a good one:

Lizard said:

They ran Windows 8 through 1.2 BILLION HOURS OF USER TESTING.”

And how many confessions DID they get from the prisoners at GitMo when they were done?

jaclaz

[JorgeA]

CoffeeFiend, on 16 December 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

In related news:
MIT professor: Windows 8 is a Christmas gift for 'someone you hate'

Here's the original blog posting. The guy sure can turn a phrase:

Quote

Due to the desperation of the average consumer to watch television at all times on all devices, the typical computer screen is fairly wide.

Quote

A reasonable user might respond to this dog’s breakfast of a user interface by trying to stick with either the familiar desktop or the new tablet. However, this is not possible.

In terms of Windows 8, the following is an important point he makes that we haven't paid a lot of attention to:

Quote

A reader asked a question about DxOMark's camera phone testing procedures. I went to the DxO site downloaded a PDF. Given the wide aspect ratio of the 27" monitor, I expected to read the PDF in one window while typing my thoughts about it in the browser. From Google Chrome, I opened the PDF document and was immediately zapped into the Metro interface's "Reader" app. My browser was gone. Although the screen is easily wide enough to display two pages simultaneously, the software elected to show just one page at a time, surrounded by massive black bars (see screen capture below). Instead of looking at a text entry box and the PDF simultaneously I would have to go back and forth between screens, trying to remember what was on each. I tried the same series of steps in Microsoft Internet Explorer and the result was the same.

He brings up the usage case where you want to get information about how a Metro app works, so you launch the browser -- but as a result the app disappears and you can't view it at the same time as the information/instructions that you found via the browser, so that you can follow what they're talking about. I found a convoluted way to accomplish this, although it's far from ideal: Go into Metro, open the app, then limit it to the one-third size. Then bring up the Start Screen, open IE, and do your search. This if far from ideal because either the minimized app will show up in type so tiny that you can't read it, or everything will be so scrunched together in the one-third view as to render it unusable. (I tried this with the music app beta signup and then IE in the Consumer Preview, which is what I have loaded on that PC at the moment. With the beta signup minimized (or whatever they call that action), the text appeared in a narrow strip and the buttons to Accept or Cancel were nowhere to be seen. Don't know if this has improved in the RP and RTM, but to judge from the Harvard prof's writing, I would guess that it hasn't.) You would have to keep resizing each of the respective apps in turn as you proceed through the instructions. PITA.

Of course, in that tired old legacy Desktop mode, it's not a problem keeping two windows of whatever size you need, open and in view and at a readable size at the same time.

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

jaclaz, on 16 December 2012 - 10:29 AM, said:

I find this a good one:

Lizard said:

They ran Windows 8 through 1.2 BILLION HOURS OF USER TESTING.”

And how many confessions DID they get from the prisoners at GitMo when they were done?

That's pretty funny!!

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

While reading the ZDNet post discussed above, I came across another ZDNet item about Windows 8 which led to this Web page.

I'm not sure about the significance of these statistics. My Vista, which is supposed to be such a bad and unstable OS and isn't even listed on Soluto's page, doesn't BSOD 0.33 or even 0.28 times a month. More like 0.08 times/month (once a year, if that). And I have a ton of stuff loaded on my PC.

--JorgeA

[jaclaz]

JorgeA, on 16 December 2012 - 11:54 AM, said:

I'm not sure about the significance of these statistics. My Vista, which is supposed to be such a bad and unstable OS and isn't even listed on Soluto's page, doesn't BSOD 0.33 or even 0.28 times a month. More like 0.08 times/month (once a year, if that). And I have a ton of stuff loaded on my PC.

That is not about BSOD's (which could be an actual measure of the stability of the OS) they are about application crashes that are very likely to be associated to the actual application (and NOT to the OS in which they run).

Dan Castellaneta said:

Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. 14% of people know that.

Check the home page of this wonderful "it's like magic" app:
https://www.soluto.com/
and guess WHO exactly could be the users base.

JFYI:
http://blog.soluto.com/

Quote

We’re excited to announce the Microsoft Surface winners!
December 13th, 2012 | Author: Doreen Levy

in
Share

Back in October, we welcomed Windows 8 to the world and wanted to help you enjoy the new OS to the fullest – on a Microsoft Surface tablet. We gave you 3 ways to win and now, after weeks of suspense, we are excited to finally introduce the Surface winners.

And - for no apparent reason - a link to the personal blog of the Chief product officer at Soluto:
http://roee.co/2012/...ld-hello-metro/

I have a completely different idea of "casual sampling" and "independent survey".

jaclaz

This post has been edited by jaclaz: 16 December 2012 - 01:24 PM

[JorgeA]

jaclaz, on 16 December 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

JorgeA, on 16 December 2012 - 11:54 AM, said:

I'm not sure about the significance of these statistics. My Vista, which is supposed to be such a bad and unstable OS and isn't even listed on Soluto's page, doesn't BSOD 0.33 or even 0.28 times a month. More like 0.08 times/month (once a year, if that). And I have a ton of stuff loaded on my PC.

That is not about BSOD's (which could be an actual measure of the stability of the OS) they are about application crashes that are very likely to be associated to the actual application (and NOT to the OS in which they run).

Dan Castellaneta said:

Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. 14% of people know that.

jaclaz

jaclaz,

Check out the last row of items above the one labeled "Most Popular PC Models." That's the one I was referring to. Yes, the Soluto webpage (as well as the article that originally linked to it) mentions application crashes, but Soluto also mentions bluescreens, and that's the item I commented on because the numbers don't jibe with my experience, so it got me wondering just how accurate/valid any of their stats might be.

But that's a good point, that application crashes don't necessarily have anything to do with the OS. It's another reason to wonder about the value of Soluto's figures.

The Dan Castellaneta quote reminds me, for no good reason , of the old joke about the public-opinion pollster who comes to the next house. He knocks on the door, and when the owner opens it...

"Hello, we are conducting an opinion survey. What do you think about the level of ignorance and apathy among the public today?"

"I don't know, and I don't care!!"

--JorgeA

[jaclaz]

JorgeA, on 16 December 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

Check out the last row of items above the one labeled "Most Popular PC Models." That's the one I was referring to.

My bad , I didn't scroll on the senslessly whitish/low information density/designed by a pre-school kid page .

Now that I read the "right" data you were referring to, yes, they make no sense.

My average NT 4.0 BSOD's (number of BSOD/months) are (for a few machines I have total and "logged" control):
0/142=0 (data since April 2001 running 24/7)
My average Windows 2000 BSOD's:
0/119=0 (data since March 2003 running 24/7)
0/87=0 (data since August 2003 NOT running 24/7)

My average Windows XP BSOD's:
2/52=0,0385 (data since September 2008 NOT running 24/7) As a matter of fact this should be halved, since one of the two BSOD's was due to hardware fault


jaclaz

[RJARRRPCGP]

Tripredacus, on 14 December 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

MagicAndre1981, on 14 December 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

So Metro is now 3 years old. WTF has MS done since then?

This:

Does Microsoft want me to be a bubble boy? lol

[JorgeA]

jaclaz, on 16 December 2012 - 02:04 PM, said:

My average NT 4.0 BSOD's (number of BSOD/months) are (for a few machines I have total and "logged" control):
0/142=0 (data since April 2001 running 24/7)
My average Windows 2000 BSOD's:
0/119=0 (data since March 2003 running 24/7)
0/87=0 (data since August 2003 NOT running 24/7)

My average Windows XP BSOD's:
2/52=0,0385 (data since September 2008 NOT running 24/7) As a matter of fact this should be halved, since one of the two BSOD's was due to hardware fault

Wow, thanks for the info. Linux fans like to boast of their favorite OS's stability, but I wonder how many of them can match this performance.

--JorgeA

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Interest for Surface RT Dropped After Launch, Study Reveals ( Tom's Hardware 2012-12-17 )

Now we know why the sudden jump to retail stores, huh? Yet another ridiculous idea ( to sell only in Microsoft Stores and online ) that needed reversal. Try as I may, I just cannot think of a wise decision out of Redmond in a very long while, but we can whip up a giant list of turds starting with the Start Menu removal. It is evidence of supreme arrogance allowing that one to remain in place to this very day.


Microsoft's corporate PR head calls out Google PR exec on Twitter ( NeoWin 2012-12-17 )

Add this to the growing list of inexplicable and irrational Apple-esque actions by Microsoft. If you read through this one ( which exceeds the chutzpah in the Scroogle and Android malware controversies ) you may question whether this company is actually self-destructing.


Ballmer Could Be Out if Windows 8 Tanks, Analysts Say ( Tom's Hardware 2012-12-17 )

Pretty obvious if you ask me. As mentioned above there is quite a list of unprofessional tactical actions under Ballmer, and a longer list of technical and strategic decisions that would have already claimed the head of anyone except for a near-founding member of Microsoft.

I think back a few years ( okay, actually had to check Wikipedia ) to the thing that almost occurred that would have sunk Microsoft for sure: "In February 2008, Microsoft Corporation made an unsolicited bid to acquire Yahoo for USD $44.6 billion.", but for the unbelievable negative response from Yahoo!, Microsoft would now be over, taking on more water than HP, Nokia, and RIM combined and most likely be out of money. Ballmer would have never survived that of course but isn't it interesting that he is still there even though such an outrageous offer was green-lit by him? It showed the extraordinary un-professionalism of letting their Google-envy cloud their judgment, and their duty as operators of this publicly traded company. The fact that he is still there, as well as whatever Board members who also went along with that speaks volumes about the efficacy of this company.

[jaclaz]

In an OTbOT (On Topic but Off Topic or Off Topic but On Topic, you choose)

I would like to have some comments on this research, on it's accuracy and overall on the fact that Forrester research was actually paid for this:
http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=36051
Particularly check Figures #7 and #8 on page 9 of the report (Figure #8 has to be read at the light of Figure #3 on page 5)

Then check how people can read it:
http://blogs.windows...r-business.aspx

jaclaz

[Joseph_sw]

Quote

Building on HTML5 with IE10 is the best way to develop for your business, today and tomorrow.

huh, where did i read that before?
something like: HTML4 with IE# is the best way.....

surely MS want you need to cough up more $$$ for another OS/Browser when HTML >5 cames around ...

Quote

Standarized corporate environtment brower

I wonder if MS will suggest for standarized web-searcher anytime soon?

[jaclaz]

Joseph_sw, on 18 December 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

huh, where did i read that before?
something like: HTML4 with IE# is the best way.....

You missed the part where Silverlight was the best way ....
http://blogs.msdn.co...ilverlight.aspx

jaclaz

[JorgeA]

CharlotteTheHarlot, on 18 December 2012 - 04:30 AM, said:

Interest for Surface RT Dropped After Launch, Study Reveals ( Tom's Hardware 2012-12-17 )

Now we know why the sudden jump to retail stores, huh? Yet another ridiculous idea ( to sell only in Microsoft Stores and online ) that needed reversal. Try as I may, I just cannot think of a wise decision out of Redmond in a very long while, but we can whip up a giant list of turds starting with the Start Menu removal. It is evidence of supreme arrogance allowing that one to remain in place to this very day.

Wow, the "desire" to have a Surface dropped from 45 percent to 21 percent after customers learned the device's price and specs.

A good comment posted on that page, that clearly explains the how and why of the drop in interest in the Surface RT:

Quote

I knew a lot of people, including myself that had a HIGH level of interest in this product. I do not own a tablet and was considering this one as my first. When their pricing came out we ALL said no. Microsoft released a NEW product at a premium price. The iPad and many Android tables have been in the market for years and people generally know what they are getting when they buy one. What genius at Microsoft thought they could jump right into the game without proving themselves to the consumer? If the RT came out at $399 WITH the keyboard, every person I know would have bought one instantly. We all talked about it and were hoping for that pricing. But no. Microsoft wanted top dollar for their product and no one wants to gamble on it. Here is an idea taken from other successful products. Take a hit on your first generation and get it into the marketplace. Then with the second gen, add more goodies and up the price. Microsoft, you killed the Surface yourself.

And the next commenter writes of the Surface Pro:

Quote

at $999 I might as well buy a laptop instead

Bingo.

Possibly the most insightful comment:

Quote

The consumers have never lost interest in the RT as there was none to begin with. RT will fail, so will W8.

--JorgeA

This post has been edited by JorgeA: 18 December 2012 - 09:56 PM

[JorgeA]

jaclaz, on 18 December 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

I would like to have some comments on this research, on it's accuracy and overall on the fact that Forrester research was actually paid for this:
http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=36051
Particularly check Figures #7 and #8 on page 9 of the report (Figure #8 has to be read at the light of Figure #3 on page 5)

I was going to download this report to read on my Vista PC, but then I saw this --

Quote

System requirements
Supported operating systems: Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2012

-- and realized that my PC didn't meet Microsoft's requirements for the download, so I didn't go any further.

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

In-app Advertising To Hit $10 Billion By 2016: Informa

Gosh, do you guys think that enthusiasts of the Metro UI will be getting bombarded by advertising right on their monitors as they're trying to get serious things done?

Oh, wait -- the Metro interface isn't for getting serious things done, it's designed to facilitate trivial pursuits. Sorry about that, never mind...

--JorgeA

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

jaclaz, on 18 December 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

I would like to have some comments on this research, on it's accuracy and overall on the fact that Forrester research was actually paid for this:
http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=36051
Particularly check Figures #7 and #8 on page 9 of the report (Figure #8 has to be read at the light of Figure #3 on page 5)

Then check how people can read it:
http://blogs.windows...r-business.aspx

Well I'm pretty much gonna need some insulin after overloading on all that sugar coating.

I cannot comment on the accuracy, I'll leave that for those in Enterprise IT. Let me just say that it sounds like a lotta marketdroid nonsense. Here is a real loaded sentence in the Forrester research ...

Quote

In September 2012, Microsoft commissioned Forrester Consulting to evaluate the considerations that IT managers weigh when deciding to standardize on a single modern browser or to support or allow the use of nonstandard browsers in the enterprise.

That is my emphasis ( and IMHO ) on their pre-positioning of MSIE as modern browser and the competition ( Chrome? ) as nonstandard browsers, and juxtaposing them on opposite sides of the word "or" . That is plain laughable considering that the most mainstream ( MSIE ) has been the least "standard" over the past decade while the most obscure ( Opera ) has usually been the most "standard". I tried reading it, but I really can't stomach it. I suspect everything that follows such an Executive Summary will be nothing but confirmation bias.

Over on the Microsoft page "Ten Reasons Why Internet Explorer 10 is Best for Business" we see their Pavlovian need to immediately and obediently succumb to the meme and market drivel with the first two being #1 Fast and #2 Fluid ( NB: Diarrhea is also fast and fluid, and like Ballmer is circling the drain ). What do those words even mean anyway? Nothing. Market drivel.

Then they have three whoppers full of chutzpah ...

Reason #6, Safer ( we are supposedly talking about MSIE right? ), I'd say this is dangerously close to Seinfeld material. I'm not even sure if this is a gag now, perhaps it is April 1 on some calendar somewhere?

Reason #8, Compatibility and migration support cites "preserves development investments with emulation for IE9, IE8, IE7, and “quirks” modes" while leaving out the high-profile MSIE6 lurch that these same corporates are trying to now correct. Yeah, they should trust Microsoft to never use planned obsolescence against them again ( or to release a buggy browser in the first place ).

Reason #9, Support for modern standards ( what is it with the word modern anyway? How about standards, period ). Microsoft speaking about web browser adherrance to standards is like a partially reformed alcoholic lecturing us on drinking.

Those five reasons right there expose this whole Forrester-Microsoft thing as a staged setup for Windows 8 and MSIE, an exercise in publicity that only P.T. Barnum could appreciate.

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Well this story about Dell asking that Microsoft not use "Windows" in the naming of Windows RT has been around for over a week now but here is a little bit more ...

Dell Warned Microsoft Over Windows RT Branding, Claims Dell Executive ( Maximum PC 2012-12-18 )

Ballmer's quote is bad enough, and shows that he has no respect for the "Windows" brand by tying ARM and RT around its neck like an albatross ...

Quote

But, obviously, nothing of that sort ever came to pass. In his reply, Ballmer told Clarke that the “Windows” name was far too important to be dropped. And that was that.

"That was that." What a ridiculous thought process which occurs in that buffon's head. No-one said to drop it. They said be accurate. Be honest. Have these concepts ever crossed your mind?

Then, one of the Dell dummies chimes in ...

Quote

This is what Neil Hand, the man in charge of Dell’s tablet business, told The Australian Financial Review in an interview: “Making sure we educate the market place on the differences was going to be a necessary action no matter what. Just calling it something different is not going to solve the problem.”

Actually it would solve the problem liar. More importantly it would be the right thing to do, and the honest thing to do. What you are rationalizing is obfuscation, the blurring of the definitions. Not only is it not even "Windows" in the proper plural sense, but it is as crazy as using "Windows CE" for MIPS or ARM. Except that this time the product is generally available to people that do not know the difference. Snake Oil or Used Car salesman are more honest.

None of these fools should be allowed to go near the product called "Windows". They will only destroy it.