Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: XAML and TSWIPM (Score 2) 90

And the ongoing implementation of misfeatures that just add instability to the OS. These "StartMenuExperienceHost" failures? WTH is the start menu 'experience' and why would I want it? Just give me the fscking Start Menu and have it do what its name implies without any bells and whistles; if I wanted some AI-curated selection of what the system thinks I want to do, I could just dump a pile of fewmets on my keyboard and get the 'experience' directly.

Comment Re:More IBM vaporware (Score 2) 19

OS/2 had no security features needed for multiuser support. It might as well have been classic MacOS. Citrix had a multiuser version of OS/2 with security tacked on, but it wasn't a realistic solution and was never popular. Building an OS without security was the moronic decision that killed it. Plus IBM never did anything meaningful to promote it so nobody cared. That it was used anywhere (especially in ATMs) was a horrible decision itself because of the lack of security features and has created untold woes. Maybe nobody ever got fired because they bought IBM, but they should have.

Comment Re: Good products (Score 4, Insightful) 102

It is neither right or wrong

It's wrong. The processor has a feature. People will reasonably assume they can use that feature. Then they find out it's disabled.

assuming the features or lack thereof is declared upfront.

If that declaration is not in the largest font size used in the materials then it's hidden.

Comment Re:Obvious answer (Score 0) 209

If you can't trust if for simple things like that, it's then a QC nightmare when you try to trust it for important code or design

A thought just occurred to me... could Microsoft relying more and more on AI-generated code explain some of the increasing enshittification of Windows? And Microsoft execs asking AI to tell them what new 'features' to add to Windows account for most of the rest?

Comment Re:not a shock (Score 0) 29

Yeah, that was a big goof, thanks for understanding.

Apple is capable of hiring talented people and creating a useful product. They just don't seem to be capable of being user-friendly in the ways that matter to me. TBH they were never great at it, and MUGs did the heavy lifting in the customer relations department for them for free. Anyway I'm totally capable of believing their performance claims, to a reasonable point, especially when the results aren't putting them first.

I wish they were friendlier, because their hardware is reasonably impressive. I'm also just not in their target demographic apparently because I'd rather have a slightly thicker device with better cooling and battery capacity.

Comment Re: How dense can they be? (Score 1) 51

It's not impossible, but the switch would be expensive. It's probably easier and just as effective just to shield them, and tie the shield to the chassis ground.

Another option would be to switch power to the radio chip, if it's in a package which makes that convenient. This might also disable bluetooth if you do it to the infotainment system, or cause a code to be set...

Comment Re:Built In Limit? (Score 1) 57

If there is a limit on the size of the config file used to identify automated traffic, then the process for updating it needs to save the updated file in temporary storage and sanity-check it; if it fails the sanity check, it should throw an error and reject the update. If it passes the sanity check, the old file should be backed up, and only then should the updated file be moved to replace the old one. That way, if there's an identifiably out-of-band update, it doesn't stomp on the current good data, and even if it passes the initial check, the previous iteration of the file is immediately recoverable to restore service. And there should be a utility that copies -- not moves -- the backup file back to the main file.

Comment Re: Mom's of the world will prevent it. (Score 1) 15

Antibacterial soap doesn't use antibiotics, it uses chemicals known to destroy antibiotics directly and physically. It's usually done with compounds they can't reasonably develop resistance to. This is easier than in antibiotics because they don't have to be safe to put in your body.

Slashdot Top Deals

All your files have been destroyed (sorry). Paul.

Working...