Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Andrew Tierney, a “reverse-engineer by night,” whose specialty is digging up bugs in embedded systems wrote on his blog cybergibbons.com, that he initially read about vulnerabilities in another one of the company’s products, NetMonitor, and decided to poke around its product line further.
This led him to discover a slew of issues in the company’s Wi-Fi-enabled thermostats running firmware version 1.2. The issues range from simple security missteps to critical oversights.
Link to Original Source
Oh and as for your signature, MS Office is a standard - found in the majority of offices with computers. MS Office is proprietary. Hence at one time, it was a proprietary standard. As far as I know, the latest versions of it's file formats still are closely regarded secrets lest Libre/FOSS software be "openly" competitive as standards should facilitate. But they aren't as competitive, as they have a proprietary "format standard" to deal with.
In what way did the original poster prove your point? I suppose the "Microsoft Tax" is fantasy.
Anytime it is impossible to get an alternative of something, obviously many like their current option. No one said it was a fantasy, and I didn't say it is how they tried to keep their lock, just that is how they go it. Capisce?
It is not a matter whether people liked or disliked Microsoft Windows it is basically all they get when they purchase a new PC.
It certainly matters! If they hate it, they won't use it. They will find another way, another job, install Linux and KDE, something. You don't have to like everything about something to like it enough to use it. When you say, "Well it is dominant! I have no choice!", and then you use it, you also say that you like the dominance and what it brings to the table, or you would refuse to use it. Remember, we always have a choice once our parents stop literally holding our hands, and we vote with every public action we take.
As for DOS you have to be kidding.
Do you know where Windows came from? It originally ran on
And get this, people didn't delete it! They ran this newfangled program called Windows because they actually
In my career, including consulting with a variety of companies with their own IT people, I've known maybe one or two that seem to be trying to hide things to create "job security".
Above you said you never come across one. Maybe you're now being honest, or I helped you think outside of the box. But they undoubtedly make things harder, and almost always unwittingly. No matter if they're a mechanic, executive, secretary, pool boy or whomever; eventually, they lose in the long run. It pays dividends to be ethical.
... sometimes the IT guy picks the path that seems less scary. That's more or less what I mean by "the path of least resistance".
Isn't that everyone? From a Christian who has faith that GOD will support and back them up in righteous causes, to the victim that finally or never stands up to abuse, to the asshole that curses you out so that you complain and post a bad review online because he knows it will drive search engine traffic, all do what is "less scary" and deemed easiest.
And that is why wisdom is more precious than rubies. It outperforms intelligence any day, if only because you can be smart and stupid at the same damned time, often because your wit is known to you and leads to undeserved confidence.
There's a problem with this idea of intuitive. "using or based on what one feels to be true even without conscious reasoning; instinctive."
I'm curious about how a computer is supposed to be intuitive.
With a certain level of knowledge, one is able to proceed. Why do you think the "Start Menu" was labeled as such?
I fear we've run head-long into this case where we expect our tools to do the work for us rather than allowing us to work more efficiently.
Isn't that what any tech does, the brunt of the "work" for us? You could cut grass by hand or even yank it up, or you could use a sickle. I too am troubled when we try to completely remove the human operator however in many things, from driving to farming. Efficiency is subjective to your measurements. One man may be able to reap and sow an entire farm, but is it making people healthier?
I'm seeing 'simplified' interfaces slapped onto complex machines that end up overlooking the details. I'm seeing this idea that the tool needs to to the job, that the user need not understand how the job is done. That is not a good thing.
Some details should be overlooked and just get in the way, sometimes they need to be hidden from view, but readily accessible. Perhaps the concept is more important than actually knowing how to do the job from scratch, depending on the application. It bothers me that so many people have a driver's license, and yet don't have a clue there are many small explosions that happen rapidly, or any other number of parts. That doesn't mean I think they should be able to rebuild an engine.
Computers don't have the potential to change the world, they already have. Unfortunately, as a direct result of how deeply they've changed the world, we no longer feel it necessary to actually learn what we're doing.
We just want the computer to do it for us.
And computers continue to change the world. I don't blame computers for us (and certainly not a direct result) feeling it necessary to understand what we're doing. That blame lies more with our education system. Don't forget, computer's do what they're told/programmed to do.
As far as education, we don't learn concepts as much as we often are taught to memorize steps to complete an action. A monkey can do that, that doesn't mean he can fully appreciate what he's done, and use creativity when needed to adapt to a different situation utilizing said experience and knowledge.
That certainly helped tip the balance, but if no one liked it for whatever reason, they wouldn't use it. Can't we be honest about this? When we do, then we can finally say, "Ok, how do we beat them at their own game?"
As a Gnome user, I wish it was a little more like KDE, and so I reckon I'll add my two cents. In the case that I'm heard, they've then possibly picked up another user(s). Since you're paying attention, I'd hope you'd make an intelligent point where appropriate and help them out. But you're right, it's quite likely you need to sit just where you are at. You'll know.
Never have, never will. Having said that, I'd like to add, we have to smart and use our talents, not be stupid and trudge along. Hacker and engineers adapt, which requires study.
Microsoft DOES do some things right. Much of they they do is just cheap decisions, that further their monopolistic goals. If all we do is hate, and don't appreciate our enemies, then we are doomed to be at their mercy. Maybe FOSS/Libre needs a marketing department?
I actually loath much of what MS stands for. I am a hardcore FOSS/Libre advocate, and use Trisquel as my OS. I'm just sick and tired of the stupidity and being limited because of such. Does this answer your question Zontar?
No. Just no. That is flat out incorrect. Windows got a lock on the desktop because you bought it with every computer whether you used it or not, and joe blow secretary or the old-school executive did not *PREFER* it to other options, s/he did not typically understand there was any alternative. And because MS has always been willing to use their position today to acquire or destroy any company that might get in their way tomorrow, of course.
Look, I don't like Microsoft's tactics, but people liked Windows for whatever reason, or they wouldn't have used it, whether there was a viable alternative or not. Many end users do not like the flawed details of many *nix alternatives.
Arent you glad that the system *allows* you to do this manually, instead of insisting on hiding all the details and just giving you an unchangeable 'view' that enables only the most commonly used options rather than confuse you?
I haven't used KDE in forever. Taking your word for it, if it is customizable easily, that is a plus. Having a standard ("unchangeable view" you might say) is also a plus. Balance is the key. Unless of course, all you want is geeks and nerds who want to be able to say, "I don't only use the terminal!"
In short, make it easy, while allowing those experienced to dig further in, or you limit your user-base, adoption, and overall contribution to everything (including KDE) in FOSS/Libre land
Of course they can't seem to get anything done, because the IT guy has their computer down.
Why not get real smart, and use both, when most appropriate? (Not sure exactly what you are referring to..) Icons can be great, if you have any idea what they represent. Hierarchies are great, if they are organized and labeled well.
I remember the first time I checked out Compiz again. It didn't have too many effects the first time, so the menu wasn't that bad, but the second go round, man was there a lot of stuff to wade through. You had the basic top menu of icons, and then you clicked through and you had a sea of everything. Was really hard to find what you were looking for, even though it was categorized, just due to the size and amount of scrolling to get to something. I always felt that could have been done much better. It wasn't a priority obviously, and I think that was a shame and hampered it.
MSWind became dominant because the people who made the purchasing decisions trusted IBM. Not because people who used the computers liked it. Most of them didn't. Now most of them do, because they've become habituated, and the thought of putting in that much effort again terrifies them.
Sure they liked it, I remember using Windows on DOS, and thought, this is cool! (I was too young and stupid to realize it was not cool to be that lazy...) People like their habits... if they didn't, they would quit, like you did Apple. We generally don't do anything that we absolutely don't like. I might not "like" my vegetables, but I like eating them if it means I get to go outside and play.