The tau that are eaten become the true Tau.
I just want interface hints. I don't use Windows 8 at work yet, but we do have Office 2013. I still have moments where I go "Hey, I can click on this!". I understand they were trying to de-clutter the interface because rows of buttons add a lot of visual garbage, but when your users can't tell the difference between your labels and your buttons something is wrong.
The advantage of a GUI is that it can communicate information visually, without needing to experiment with the mouse or keyboard. Oh, this is grayed out. I can't do that right now. This window has a little angled ridge in the lower right corner. I bet I can do something with that. I know what scroll bars do, I know what a red X button in the corner means, I know what OK and Cancel mean. Don't take that convention away all at once. There's a very subtle difference between removing decorations from the ribbon interface that we already recognize as a toolbar/menu (and has definitely matured to be a superior interface) and removing decorations to things that may or may not be interactive.
I've watched people get frustrated with the Windows 8 interface because there were no visual clues about where the interface was to do things. The charms menu is hidden, and prior to 8.1, so was the Start button. Honestly, it's like publishing a website and changing your anchor tags to have the same visual style as standard text. If all the text is regular black on white and my only clue to a link is when the mouse pointer changes, well, I'm not going to follow any of those links just because I can't find them. People get stuck in the Start menu, or can't find printers, or can't find the control panel, or can't figure out how to shut the system down. They moved things, created new conventions of giving screen corners meaning, and then eliminated all hints.
Yeah, I tend to look at Chrome's version numbers as Chrome 1.xx. So we're currently at Chrome 1.33. When you realize that, the rapid release schedule make a lot more sense. Google just never plans to increment the true major version number, so they just drop it.
It's the same with Firefox. It's true major version number is around 7.0, but it's really not far removed to just say that everything after Firefox 3.6 is part of Firefox 4.0, meaning we're on Firefox 4.27 now.
Of course it's still widely used. Windows 2000 is still widely used, too. That doesn't mean both are not past their prime.
Certainly people use Illumos, too, but since Oracle acquired Sun and all but killed Solaris by making it closed source (or limited access source) and eliminating support for OpenSolaris, there is virtually no redeeming quality to the OS over any other flavor of Unix or Linux (ZFS is all that occurs to me) particularly when Oracle Linux exists. Oracle has a horribly infamous reputation as an ISV -- I think only SCO (now TSC) has a worse reputation -- and choosing to go with them as a vendor seems awfully risky given how they've treated the other Sun assets. I'd be much more comfortable support-wise with a Windows Server system running SQL Server instead of Oracle Solaris running Database.
With a trade-off of about 3-5 times the processing power required to decode. I learned that the hard way when trying to play movies on my old netbook with an Atom N270.
Joke's on them. Nobody at Slashdot actually reads the articles.
It's legal because the computer isn't the employee's. The company owns the computer sending the transmission, the copper from the computer to the inspection hardware, pays for Internet access, and writes policies that computer and Internet usage is for work-related purposes only and all usage is subject to security measures including traffic inspection.
The better question is: Why do you think using someone else's computer on someone else's network to transmit secure data over someone else's network connection means that they can't look at what you're doing? If you don't want them to look, don't do it where they can see.
Actually, that wasn't a rhetorical question. I actually meant "How am I able to know this? How am I, as a customer, able to learn which unresolved security vulnerabilities exist for my product/device/software?" I maintain that as long as I do not know when Apple support ends, I cannot rely on Apple for security simply because I cannot tell the difference between no support (not supported, vulnerability, no updates), ineffective support (supported, vulnerability, no updates), and unnecessary support (supported, no vulnerability, no updates). It is insufficient to only know the existence or lack of existence of updates to determine the actual security of the system. It is therefore unreliable and unpredictable, which is worthless in the security world. Why, then, would I chose Apple to secure my data over any other vendor? Because it's products are shiny?
It does do that. Both of those, in fact (search for "Windows Easy Transfer"). Yes, even in XP, although we'd consider it very archaic today if you used what was built in at the time. You don't necessarily even need the Easy Transfer tool if you've got the installation media. It's just not supported to migrate directly to 8 without a clean install. The supported upgrade path for XP is to Vista. If you wanted to go to 8, you'd have to upgrade to Vista, then 7, then 8.
Yes, you very likely need to do a clean installation. This is what happens when your vendor moved on 7 years ago and you wait to be 3 versions out of date. The upgrade from XP to 7 or 8 isn't quite as severe as moving from Mac OS 9 to OS X, but honestly it's not that far removed. MS just doesn't hide what it's doing from you like Apple does.
When someone reports a vulnerability in your ancient OS and Apple doesn't respond. Has that happened? Ever?
How should I know? Does Apple release a list of unresolved vulnerabilities on products? Are you suggesting that I must maintain my own watchlist for CVEs? Even assuming I can use that information, how do I know when to start my watchlist? Day 1? Day 100? Day 1000? We're back with the same question again. I do not know and have no way of knowing directly when an Apple product ends support.
If two people independently read the same meaning in a message you've written, it's unlikely the problem is with the reader.
That is not an improvement. How am I supposed to know when my product isn't supported? Do I plan to purchase something new, or should I just wait another month? For that matter, how does Apple know when my product isn't supported? How do OS X software developers know when products aren't officially supported?
With Microsoft, I can tell you to the day when support ends for previous versions, and I know exactly when support will end for current versions. You know exactly when your clocks start ticking, and you have 1-2 years of notice when new products are released before entering a limited support phase. They have a published life cycle policy, and it makes it very easy to see exactly how everything works: http://support.microsoft.com/l...
You do not understand. Not supporting something 7 years old is perfectly fine. Neglecting to inform your customers that their support is ending or has ended is not.
Collect massive amounts of power, and beam it towards a planet. What could possibly go wrong?
Actually, that's the correct question to ask. Not because "lol death star," but because we would risk becoming dependent on a power source of this scale. What happens then? Just what do they expect to happen when the thing breaks? We can't exactly be without power while we plan a mission to the moon, wait for the monthly window, and then hope we don't have bad weather. You thought waiting for the power company to repair a downed line took a long time? Now imagine the downed line is 390,000 km away!
It's also important to recognize that it's only profitable in the US because here, copyright laws haven't been updated to account for widespread personal copyright infringement. They were written with the intent of shutting down direct piracy for profit: copying a movie to thousands of tapes and reselling them for profit. That's why the penalty is so severe. Since the law doesn't qualify piracy, however, everything qualifies for this penalty. That's why jumping on a torrent for a movie can get you a fine for $250,000 and five years in prison, but walking out of Target with half a dozen games, CDs, or movies only gets you (in my state) up to a $500 fine and 3 months in jail.
The punishment here so grossly exceeds the severity of the crime, it's actually laughable.