|
|
|
 |
|

September 15th, 2005, 09:40 AM
|
 |
Major
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Searching for a holy grail.
Posts: 1,001
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Well for starters the UKs had a 'Standard Gauge' act since the 1840s, with only the Great Western any different. And even that was changed over 1892 (Overnight. As in literally one nights work! Amazing what you can do with no H&S to slow you down). So actually all UK railtracks are the same gauge and have been for over a centuty. (The things you learn playing Railtoad Tycoon hey.  )
The US didn't pioneer standard gauge, the NE US used standard (copied off the Brits I might add  ) and the rest used random sizes, anywhere between 4ft and 6ft in fact. This was a problem when railroads started to meet up, so eventually late 1880s they went for standard gauge for all US rail, spending the next few years doing all the conversions. So in fact US rails have been standardised, again for about a century.
This doesn't bode well for you arguments Puke, if I'm honest.
Especially as computer hardware has standards, rock solid ones. You can buy any hardware from any company and it will work in your machine as long as both are on the same standard. How many other industries can say that?
Software is shakier, mainly as MS changes standards to make them more propietry. Internet Explorer is not standard compliant off the top of my head.
Finally I think Sir Tim Berners-Lee and CERN would have something to say about inventing the internet as we know it. Quite alot actually.
__________________
He who disagrees with me in private, call him a fool. He who disagrees with me in public, call him an ambulance.
|

September 15th, 2005, 07:52 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: DC Burbs USA
Posts: 1,460
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Quote:
El_Phil said:
Finally I think Sir Tim Berners-Lee and CERN would have something to say about inventing the internet as we know it. Quite alot actually.
|
Sir Tim was responsible for the www. That we love so much, not the redundant WAN. DARPA and a few universities sitting on a bunch of fed funded supercomputing developed the RWAN. Public side of it was to insure communications if the cold war went hot in a limited exchange. Private side and the reason that the Air force poured money into it was to influence the Soviet target list. When it went on line in 66 IIRC, most of the nodes were located in out of the way low target value areas. Data transmission was coded teletype. Later, the same wires carried the first binary data. Security was pressurized conduit. But soon after, the CIA/Navy developed a way to tap pressurized conduit, but that’s another story some of you may have heard parts of.
As for CERN, they have added a lot of functionality to the net, but they to came late to the game, building on DOD technology. Also of note would be that TCP/IP came from the DOD. If they had chosen to sit on it, we would probably started the WWW with IDP/SPP or DECnet, which was the high power network of the early 80’s DEC Pathworks was how Apple, DOS and Windows connected to it. And of late, the NIX community has started to use it again.
__________________
Think about it
|

September 15th, 2005, 10:00 PM
|
 |
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 251
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Security.
Take a 9x machine.
Install TCP.
Connect to Net.
Take a XP SP1 machine.
Install TCP.
Connect to Net.
Which box gets rooted?
That's right--the XP box.
Why?
Exploitable services exposed to the net.
Now put the two in the soft and gooey interior of a LAN. They'll both get 0wned. Why? File sharing was installed, of course, and being on the "protected" interior of the LAN, they don't have any workstation-level protection installed and thus fall to the next worm that gets through the LAN's eggshell exterior.
But Sivran, Microsoft issued a patch!
Ah, but patches, after the arduous Microsoft testing cycle, must also face the corporate testing cycle, delaying implementation perhaps long enough for the network to get 0wned.
Games.
Take an old game. Let's say Descent, or Descent II. Install on 98. Game runs. Joystick may be a hassle depending on model, but game runs. Install on XP. Game does not run. Compatability mode isn't.
"Up"grading.
In all seriousness, why should someone downgrade from 98SE to XP? What benefits do they get, that they cannot also get from 2k if they seriously need it?
They will still face the same spyware threats. They will still face the same browser exploit threats. They will still face email-borne virus threats.
They will not face the worm-without-user-intervention threats--9x is not susceptible at all unless file and print sharing is exposed. XP is susceptible, even if file and print sharing isn't even there.
Software still runs on 9x. 9x can be quite stable--the trick, I find, is simply not using IE, and avoiding memory and resource-leaking programs like some ancient versions of ZoneAlarm.
Multimedia still plays on 9x. Just need the codecs.
Everything is still in a familiar place, same as it was in 95. No silly rearranged menus or control panels.
You don't have to rent 98 like you rent XP.
Erm. Where's the advantage of XP again?
|

September 16th, 2005, 02:51 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Another "great" comparison based on observations tonight:
SJ's laptop:
166Mhz, 48 megs of ram, win 98.
SJ's sister's laptop:
1.5 Ghz, 512megs of ram, winXP.
---
Q) Which runs faster?
A) Neither. It was a trick question: they both have about the same speed and responsiveness.
__________________
Things you want:
|

September 16th, 2005, 08:39 AM
|
 |
Major
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Searching for a holy grail.
Posts: 1,001
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
I only went up to XP because some programmes flatly refused to run on 98/ME, or ran awfully. I got Dawn of War which had a developer admited 'feature' that it ran awfully on 98/ME as the memory management was optimised for XP.
That aside I wouldn't of bothered, I'm still not convinced myself.
Oh and Thermy that's a bad argument, as you well know. Different people can invent the same thing, I agree it happened slightly faster because DoD released it but something similar (or perhaps better  ) with a couple of years. Lots of people were working in the field, inventors do exist outside of the US you know. 
__________________
He who disagrees with me in private, call him a fool. He who disagrees with me in public, call him an ambulance.
|

September 16th, 2005, 09:27 AM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: DC Burbs USA
Posts: 1,460
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Quote:
El_Phil said:
Oh and Thermy that's a bad argument, as you well know. Different people can invent the same thing, I agree it happened slightly faster because DoD released it but something similar (or perhaps better ) with a couple of years. Lots of people were working in the field, inventors do exist outside of the US you know.
|
Do you have any idea of the money that was spent to develop TCP/IP? Or how many people worked on it? Only the US or USSR could have done it during that period in time. There are very few people in the world that know everything about what it can do and how it does it. Most people don’t have a clue. How many of you know what is taking place at each of the layers, or what the layers are? I’m not trying to say that Americans are smarter than the rest of the world, and I’m sure that there were foreign nationals that contributed to the project. What I’m saying is the US had the technical foresight and the economic strength to develop it even though the original use was just to connect dissimilar DOD systems on a RWAN, and to insure reliable data transmission. As to having the same idea at the same time, smartest and best funded person usually wins the race. There are 100’s of network protocols, but none have been able to displace TCP/IP. It has just been too robust, too adaptable, and too deployed for any one to give it any kind of a challenge.
__________________
Think about it
|

September 16th, 2005, 10:28 AM
|
 |
Major
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Searching for a holy grail.
Posts: 1,001
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Sure we wouldn't be where we are today without the money chucked at it (of course as a defence project it could have been done far cheaper by almost anyone else. This isn't a dig at US defence contractors, it's a dig at the Worlds defence projects.  ))
I would definetly dispute the technical foresight part. It was a task specific job, nobody involved was planning for any big public use. Oh sure maybe the odd one or two lower down, but I'd bet none of the money men.
A final point, the best technical system regularly loses. Everything from Betamax and Minidisc through to hardware standards and fighter jets (TSR-2 **sob**). Marketing and politics normally determines it.
In this case as TCP/IP was used by the millitary and universites it had an unmatchable deployed base and couldn't lose.
Much like Windows actually. It doesn't matter what the future versions are like, the installed base is so high developers only work on the MS version (others if they have time, which they normally don't) and it's up to bodges and fixes to get programmes to work on other platforms.
__________________
He who disagrees with me in private, call him a fool. He who disagrees with me in public, call him an ambulance.
|

September 16th, 2005, 08:54 AM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: DC Burbs USA
Posts: 1,460
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Quote:
Sivran said:
Security.
Take a 9x machine.
Install TCP.
Connect to Net.
Take a XP SP1 machine.
Install TCP.
Connect to Net.
Which box gets rooted?
That's right--the XP box.
Why?
Exploitable services exposed to the net.
Now put the two in the soft and gooey interior of a LAN. They'll both get 0wned. Why? File sharing was installed, of course, and being on the "protected" interior of the LAN, they don't have any workstation-level protection installed and thus fall to the next worm that gets through the LAN's eggshell exterior.
But Sivran, Microsoft issued a patch!
Ah, but patches, after the arduous Microsoft testing cycle, must also face the corporate testing cycle, delaying implementation perhaps long enough for the network to get 0wned.
Games.
Take an old game. Let's say Descent, or Descent II. Install on 98. Game runs. Joystick may be a hassle depending on model, but game runs. Install on XP. Game does not run. Compatability mode isn't.
"Up"grading.
In all seriousness, why should someone downgrade from 98SE to XP? What benefits do they get, that they cannot also get from 2k if they seriously need it?
They will still face the same spyware threats. They will still face the same browser exploit threats. They will still face email-borne virus threats.
They will not face the worm-without-user-intervention threats--9x is not susceptible at all unless file and print sharing is exposed. XP is susceptible, even if file and print sharing isn't even there.
Software still runs on 9x. 9x can be quite stable--the trick, I find, is simply not using IE, and avoiding memory and resource-leaking programs like some ancient versions of ZoneAlarm.
Multimedia still plays on 9x. Just need the codecs.
Everything is still in a familiar place, same as it was in 95. No silly rearranged menus or control panels.
You don't have to rent 98 like you rent XP.
Erm. Where's the advantage of XP again?
|
Hey Sirvan, see post above, Buy a book, take a class, hire a pro. Because you don’t have a clue. First off, 9x can be exploited by anyone who can touch the machine. And any second year computer tech student that can touch it on the net. Second you should be securing XP before you expose it to the net. Third, you should have a hardware firewall between you and any high speed WAN. Fourth, LAN systems are secured with GP and are tightly locked down, unless the LAN manager needs to see post above also. Fifth, you get what you pay for. If you buy a single stand alone license, you can install XP on any single system you want, one at a time just like 98. The copy that comes preinstalled on the Compaq from CompUSA is a discounted OEM install, and not transferable. Read the fine print before you buy! Sixth, as to the 9X games you love, ever hear of dual booting?
PS: Here’s your sign.
__________________
Think about it
|

September 17th, 2005, 12:16 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Thermodyne, please do not quote huge posts in the future. Ellipses work miracles.
|

September 17th, 2005, 12:29 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 15,630
Thanks: 0
Thanked 30 Times in 18 Posts
|
|
Re: Microsoft VISTA
Man that was a read!
__________________
Creator of the Star Trek Mod - AST Mod - 78 Ship Sets - Conquest Mod - Atrocities Star Wars Mod - Galaxy Reborn Mod - and Subterfuge Mod.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|