“I Contribute to the Windows Kernel. We Are Slower Than Other OS” (2013)
blog.zorinaq.com
blog.zorinaq.com
This is true. Windows 7 had an easy way to create adhoc wifi but win 8 removed it. So now I must either use command prompt or install connectify.
WP has too many examples:
Music app has been rewritten multiple times and rebranded almost as many times.
Email has also been rewritten and renamed - new version is slightly better.
The excellent lumia camera has been replaced by a meh windows camera app.
Internet explorer's been replaced by the featureless edge IMO.
Instead of fixing the Skype app (missed notifications, memory consumption issues, performance issues, calls ringing even if the target is OFFLINE, inaccurate notification count...) a bland messaging and Skype video apps were introduced. So we've got three apps for Skype on Windows 10 and windows mobile.
...and many more
Seems like the solution is neither in engineering nor product, but marketing- companies need to get better at explaining when a low-new-features iteration is intended for stability and streamlining of existing features.
What happened to window essentials ? I don't want to use outlook, that email client was enough and supporter RSS feed reading.
Windows 7 Professional has it. Windows 7 Home doesn't have this feature.
Right-click -> Properties -> Advanced
I don't want to be held hostage, so web apps and the cloud can kiss my shiny metal behind. I'll keep my data and apps on my own machine until ideas like sandstorm find a middle way in which I can stay in control of my data.
Don't you think that for companies like Google, Microsoft, etc. this is a feature, not a bug ? Microsoft would lose too many customers if they went full-on webapps, but everyone else won't.
And customers like it ! Wtf ? But it makes sense : no install troubles, no running out of diskspace, no losing files (of course on occasion someone else loses your files. Like Amazon did a few months ago), ... But there's many false advantages, too. Webapps are most definitely not virus-proof (just ask any online banking security guy. Poor suckers), as a client side virus can change what's on the screen or just take over the browser window when you close it, or proxy the webapp, or ...
But if you sell someone a program that works and they install and use it, ... well that's it. You got paid but that's the end of it. You get someone to run their business on a webapp, in the next negotiation you have the power to kill the other company's access to their own financial data. Or designs, or ... You got them by the throat.
40 years takes you to 1976, at which point there's no longer any ISA-level compatibility between the hardware we have now and the hardware Unix ran on then. Basically, nothing we have looks like a PDP-11 to software, and Unix didn't run on much else in the mid-1970s.
(Tidbit: 1976 is when the Lions book came out. Full source code, with apposite and useful comments, for Sixth Edition Unix, passed around as samizdat long afterwords due to Bell Labs enforcing copyright on the Unix source code not long after.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions%27_Commentary_on_UNIX_6t...
BTW, I love to use original Lotus 123 with DOS inside asm.js if someone can use their supper power to make that materialized.
I still remember those "/FS" keystrokes after so many years.
I kept finding places which needed adjustment for a modern architecture... and then I looked more closer and saw that they were actually fine. About the only thing I needed to do in the end was fix some headers, rename a symbol which was clashing with a modern utility function, and change the directory reading stuff to use opendir() instead of read().
Everything else just worked on a modern 64-bit system. (It had already been converted from K&R to ANSI C in an earlier pass by someone else.) Good grief, that code is clean. Incomprehensible, but clean.
If you're just referring to eg the gnu tools or whatever, then you'll still need to recompile.
My Google-fu isn't turning up any non-redacted versions of this line; all I see are the countless copies of this redacted version made over the last 3 years.
It would be nice to be able to note the file and hash references in question in the case the opportunity ever arises to verify this. That would be pretty cool :)
IMO releasing one filename is not really a security issue, and a hash is categorically useless garbage.
(this link came from the Reddit thread in which this article was discussed the other day - https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4amfp2/i_contr...)