if you know DCOM, i have a question, how do you get it to run against disjoint domains that have no trusts established.
if you know DCOM, i have a question, how do you get it to run against disjoint domains that have no trusts established.
Micro$oft is the Borg of software. :| The history of their business ethics marks them as an evil predator to be feared and avoided as much as possible.
I have a basic rule that I will not move to a newer version of Windows for at least two years after it is released. Their other products are almost always equally buggy on release, after which they want to charge you for three or four "upgrades" until they finally get the bugs out. Then, they continue the act by having to fix the new bugs in the newer versions.
How can this affect you? How about this 1998 article about how Win NT left a U.S. Navy warship dead in the water?
I have a basic rule that I will not move to a newer version of Windows for at least two years after it is released. Their other products are almost always equally buggy on release, after which they want to charge you for three or four "upgrades" until they finally get the bugs out. Then, they continue the act by having to fix the new bugs in the newer versions.
How can this affect you? How about this 1998 article about how Win NT left a U.S. Navy warship dead in the water?
Under battle conditions, the last two things you want to happen at the same time is a BSOD and someone yelling, "INCOMING!""
I don't believe you can run DCOM between two non-trusted domains.... not entirely sure. I'll ask our programmer
Originally posted by: Harvey
Micro$oft is the Borg of software. :| The history of their business ethics marks them as an evil predator to be feared and avoided as much as possible.
I have a basic rule that I will not move to a newer version of Windows for at least two years after it is released. Their other products are almost always equally buggy on release, after which they want to charge you for three or four "upgrades" until they finally get the bugs out. Then, they continue the act by having to fix the new bugs in the newer versions.
How can this affect you? How about this 1998 article about how Win NT left a U.S. Navy warship dead in the water?Under battle conditions, the last two things you want to happen at the same time is a BSOD and someone yelling, "INCOMING!""
Who in their right mind would authorize running Windows NT on a warship? Does the Navy have too much money that they would waste it on NT
It says I have some experience with DCOM/COM/COM+ not that I know it. (DCOM isn't my main interest or focus)
This post marks the arrival of the Microsoft haters.
Windows isn't all bad, nor is Office. The reasons why I don't use them, however, are pretty simple:
1. They are too constraining. You can only change a few superficial aspects. In free OS's like Linux and BSD, you can change EVERYTHING, and even Mac OS X lets you choose more than Fading menus or not, or what color you want your rectangular window title gradient to be.
2. They're hard to troubleshoot. In the interest of not scaring newbies, Microsoft has chosen to have their products give worthless error messages like "The operation failed." or "This program has caused an error and will now close." How the fvck am I supposed to know that the former was caused by a daemon I forgot to start not running, or the latter was a segfault? In Linux, and most of it's software, you get highly detailed messages that, although frightening to newbies, really do make things easier to fix. Being told to "contact yout system administrator" is not helpful.
3. They are too expensive. I will NOT pay $300 for an operating system. I just won't. I'm not going to pay $600 for a word processor with a sh!tty scripting language either.
4. With every release, Microsoft takes more and more control away from you. Starting with Windows 2000, you can no longer delete or replace various files that have been designated "System Files." This makes it even harder to remove Internet Explorer, Media Player, and crap like that. Starting with Windows ME, and also seen ing Windows XP, you can't change the double-click behavior for some file types anymore. For example, even if you associate, say, Photoshop with JPEG files, double clicking them is going to open windows' built in viewer, no matter what. Double clicking an MP3 isn't going to open Winamp. And so on.
5. The licenses for Windows and the stuff M$ bundles with it get more frightening with every release. From what I've heard, the EULA for the Media Player bugfix package they released recently lets them disable software on your computer without you even knowing?!
I switched to Linux not because I hated Microsoft, but because I hated Windows. I'm not going back because I hate Microsoft. Palladium isn't my problem, it's yours. Enjoy.
Windows isn't all bad, nor is Office. The reasons why I don't use them, however, are pretty simple:
1. They are too constraining. You can only change a few superficial aspects. In free OS's like Linux and BSD, you can change EVERYTHING, and even Mac OS X lets you choose more than Fading menus or not, or what color you want your rectangular window title gradient to be.
2. They're hard to troubleshoot. In the interest of not scaring newbies, Microsoft has chosen to have their products give worthless error messages like "The operation failed." or "This program has caused an error and will now close." How the fvck am I supposed to know that the former was caused by a daemon I forgot to start not running, or the latter was a segfault? In Linux, and most of it's software, you get highly detailed messages that, although frightening to newbies, really do make things easier to fix. Being told to "contact yout system administrator" is not helpful.
3. They are too expensive. I will NOT pay $300 for an operating system. I just won't. I'm not going to pay $600 for a word processor with a sh!tty scripting language either.
4. With every release, Microsoft takes more and more control away from you. Starting with Windows 2000, you can no longer delete or replace various files that have been designated "System Files." This makes it even harder to remove Internet Explorer, Media Player, and crap like that. Starting with Windows ME, and also seen ing Windows XP, you can't change the double-click behavior for some file types anymore. For example, even if you associate, say, Photoshop with JPEG files, double clicking them is going to open windows' built in viewer, no matter what. Double clicking an MP3 isn't going to open Winamp. And so on.
5. The licenses for Windows and the stuff M$ bundles with it get more frightening with every release. From what I've heard, the EULA for the Media Player bugfix package they released recently lets them disable software on your computer without you even knowing?!
I switched to Linux not because I hated Microsoft, but because I hated Windows. I'm not going back because I hate Microsoft. Palladium isn't my problem, it's yours. Enjoy.
300 bucks for Windows? Umm..
And Word is not 600 bucks. I can get it localy for around 100 bucks CANADIAN. That is a very reasonable price and within the price range of most software titles out there.
I wasn't aware of the file association stuff but I like to associate all my media files except for Real to Windows Media Player. RealOne Player has been doing an excellent job at annoying the crap out of me by associating my media files to itself. So I don't know what you're talking about.
I agree that the Media Player EULA is pretty dumb. Not to mention that it is far too overbloated.
Don't ya think some of that is bs?
So you've basically been using windows ever since 1st grade
You learned html at 10
You provided "tech support" in the 5th grade?
I mostly support MS at work, but at home it is mostly Linux.
At work - everything MS except for Openoffice, Jext, Photoshop & Gimp.
At home - a gamut of linuxes & Win98/Office97/IE6. Openoffice, Staroffice, Apache, MySQL, RedHat/Debian, KDE, Jext, Php, JSP, Java Script, Java, Snort, SSH, Konqueror, Mozilla.
Virtually all features of the Windows Shell (GUI) can be modified/extended by programmers. There are almost total Windows Shell replacements available (for a price
). Just because you haven't seen it done does NOT mean that it can't be done. Granted, there will always be some things you cannot do without the Source code. That is an inherent limitation of closed-source software - but it is also a benifit in some regards.You need to give more concrete examples. Almost ALL of the 'BSOD's are caused by faulty *Drivers*. Blame the driver manufacturers and not MS.
Window XP Pro OEM can be had for $140. Where did you get the $300 figure? As for Office, nobody is forcing you to buy it.
I will again say: Just because YOU can't do something does not mean that it can't be done. All the complaints you listed above can be bypassed totally. Since most ordinary users have no problem with them, the solutions are not publicized.
If you don't agree with the license, you don't have to install the software. There are other generic Media Players available. Use them.
I switched to Linux not because I hated Microsoft, but because I hated Windows. I'm not going back because I hate Microsoft. Palladium isn't my problem, it's yours. Enjoy.
Thanks, we Windows programmers will deal with it.
Yes, I provided tech support in the 5th grade and also learned HTML once I started maintaining a website in the 5th grade (age 10) and yes, I've been using Windows (3x) since 1st grade and before. I used it just to mess around and use Word to type stuff up - couldn't do much more since we didn't get I-net access until the summer before I started 5th grade.
How, then, do you know there are solutions to these problems?
Please inform me as to how I can install Windows XP Professional without installing Media Player and Internet Explorer?
Originally posted by: manly
Damn straight, Winblows ME was a drastic improvement over W2K and W98SE.Originally posted by: baffled2
Overall, I'm quite pleased with MS products, each new OS is more robust than the last
Hey Manly, you have to be joking ... right ?
Even though WinMe was more like 983rd edition.... it still sucks, and most people just go back to the more mature 98se.
Second, W2K is FAR better than Win Me could ever hope to be.... not even close.
Maybe you were just being sarcastic.... if so, I'm sorry....
~ HardwareAddicted
ed21x
Diamond Member
- Oct 12, 2001
- 5,411
- 8
- 81
Originally posted by: tenchim
I thought you "knew" DCOM?
okiee... next question in C++, what's the difference between an array, a matrix, and a linked list?
oh, and since you're exhibiting your javascript skillz, it might be nice for you to use some for some simple rollover affects on you website
Because I'm a programmer - I have much more control over the OS than say, a user
I did not comment on Installation - only usage. If I implied anything of the sort, my apologies
Fritzo
Lifer
- Jan 3, 2001
- 41,920
- 2,161
- 126
Originally posted by: Electrode
This post marks the arrival of the Microsoft haters.
Windows isn't all bad, nor is Office. The reasons why I don't use them, however, are pretty simple:
1. They are too constraining. You can only change a few superficial aspects. In free OS's like Linux and BSD, you can change EVERYTHING, and even Mac OS X lets you choose more than Fading menus or not, or what color you want your rectangular window title gradient to be.
2. They're hard to troubleshoot. In the interest of not scaring newbies, Microsoft has chosen to have their products give worthless error messages like "The operation failed." or "This program has caused an error and will now close." How the fvck am I supposed to know that the former was caused by a daemon I forgot to start not running, or the latter was a segfault? In Linux, and most of it's software, you get highly detailed messages that, although frightening to newbies, really do make things easier to fix. Being told to "contact yout system administrator" is not helpful.
3. They are too expensive. I will NOT pay $300 for an operating system. I just won't. I'm not going to pay $600 for a word processor with a sh!tty scripting language either.
4. With every release, Microsoft takes more and more control away from you. Starting with Windows 2000, you can no longer delete or replace various files that have been designated "System Files." This makes it even harder to remove Internet Explorer, Media Player, and crap like that. Starting with Windows ME, and also seen ing Windows XP, you can't change the double-click behavior for some file types anymore. For example, even if you associate, say, Photoshop with JPEG files, double clicking them is going to open windows' built in viewer, no matter what. Double clicking an MP3 isn't going to open Winamp. And so on.
5. The licenses for Windows and the stuff M$ bundles with it get more frightening with every release. From what I've heard, the EULA for the Media Player bugfix package they released recently lets them disable software on your computer without you even knowing?!
I switched to Linux not because I hated Microsoft, but because I hated Windows. I'm not going back because I hate Microsoft. Palladium isn't my problem, it's yours. Enjoy.
Wow....do you have some bad/misinformed arguments there:
1. Exactly how much stuff do you want to change? XP lets you change pretty much the entire interface, but if you change things too much, there will be no standardization.....meaning no support (which is the problem with Linux). Can you imagine someone calling tech support for a modem problem when they've customized their entire shell? It's be murder!
2. MS error messages haven't been that obscure since Windows 3.1. Win9x+2000+XP gives you the file that caused the error, the file it affected, and the cause of the error. Networking errors are given three digit codes that can be looked up in Technet or at support.microsoft.com. Fixes for specific error messages can also be found there.
3. Windows XP Pro retails for $299, but it's usually found for around $199 and can commonly be found for $179 or less. The Home edition can be had for as little as $99 (or less).
4. You can so remove IE, Media Player, etc, but why would you want to? If you don't like the app, just don't use it. IE is the best and most compatible browser out there, so I'm not sure why you'd want to use something else (Netscape stinks, and Opera has too many compatibility problems). Media Player is bloated, but many people use WinAMP. There is NOT ANY KNOWN PROBLEM WITH CHANGING FILE ASSOCIATIONS WITH MEDIA FILES. I don't know where you got that from. I use XP, and have Winamp open MP3 and WAV files, open my image files with Photoshop Elements, and have changed many other file associations. That statement was just totally wrong.
5. The EULA patch fiasco was blown way out of proportion. The meaning of the new agreement was so MS could issue patches to disable or modify portions of your OS that are causing security problems. Paroniod people took this to mean that MS was going to use this to disable your ability to play media files----that's crap. This was done so security patches could be released faster, not to make your life miserable. I wish these people would go back to the grassy gnoll and spy on Area 51.
Windows XP is an excellent product. It's got compatibility, awesome featues, stability, and flexibility. Everything people wanted is finally here. Linux is losing support recently because of all the "elitists" out there using it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter