Posts by Fletchulence 40 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Aug 2013
Really? Or is it the vast swathes of compromised machines in the PRC controlled by script kiddies over here in the West?
If they really still have that many machines on XP, there is a legitimate argument for asking MS to extend support. The more compromised machines over there, the bigger the DOSnets, the worse for the West.
First PC I ever saw was at work in the early 90's. One nightshift 3 IBM support "engineers" arrived and said they had to lock down the PC because someone had bypassed the operating software, accessed DOS and that wasn't allowed. They all scratched their heads for 10 minutes arguing about how to access DOS on the machine, so I helpfully suggested a boot disk. After they'd agreed none of them had a boot disk I asked if they'd like to borrow mine. At which point, of course, the cries began "It was you! You're the one!".
Actually, I didn't have a problem with MS bundling their web browser with their OS. And I have some serious gripes with MS. I started using FF because it had been recomended by people who's opinions I respected, and because having tried it I felt it to be superior. I then recomended FF to other people because it was IMHO "better" than IE. And that's how it should be.
When I'm asked a "how do I do this" question, it's now standard to ask "why" five times so I can boil it down from what the user thinks they're trying to do, and what they actually (without knowing it) actually want.
I'm afraid they will always be "users" to me.
If I'm in a meeting with my boss, and while I'm talking he decides to ignore me in favour of a call from his wife about what they're going to have for dinner I just walk off. Then email him and ask when we will actually be able to hold the meeting or indeed, if the meeting is in fact a priority or not.
These do happen. For me it's a bit rich to accuse of system of failing the patient because one the basis of one days downtime. I'd need to know what benefits it created the days it was running. Then I have an idea of whether this is a story or not.
If, on the other hand, they can't quantify the benefits of the system, just turn the bloody thing off of course.
I can spend £30000 (more actually) in order to rectify the issue of having bought a wifi only tablet. I have a cunning plan to fix the wifi problem. Cost, about £300. Take off that what you can get for punting your wifi only tablet on an online tat bazar.
In a nutshell, I don't see the 4G "feature" as likely to form part of a buying decision.
I'm probably in the wrong forum.
But I do think Apple might take a look at how Android handles this. They tell you roughly when an update will be available then stagger the distribution over a few days. Rather than letting everyone try at once.
On a side note, I was midly horrified to hear a fellow employee this morning tell me the update had removed every one of his installed apps. The horror wasn't the fact they'd been deleted. It was that he seemed to think it was acceptable.
I'm still unsure why anyone would care if Google are doing this primarily to generate more AD revenue. We don't have nearly enough research going on with regard to human health. I'm more interested in the fact a multi billion corporation is doing something constructibe with it's money than why they are doing it.
There is currently little to no margin in selling hardware, and in the near future there will be none at all.
The only option to make money for technology vendors will be through control of the users digital purchases. Google know this, as do Amazon. Apple need to realise this if they expect to survive. I'm betting they won't.
Didn't sound to me like he "stuck it to them". The whole plan is ridiculous - changing your number so if your mates call you they have to pay? And saying he "made" money? I wouldn't work for £4 an hour chatting to PPI salesmen at the expense of my hard earned leisure time. And nor would any sane person.
Agreed - as per the article Intel are really interested in volume, not bleeding edge. Until there's a software requirement for more processing power in a mass market piece of software (I can't think of anything) then todays speeds remain more than adequate. Improvements in code seem to have reduced the need for speed (again, at the mass market).
I fell for that trap - wondered why Vodafone offered me a deal if I changed my number then found out why. I "inherited" what can only have been a number belonging to a complete moron who gave it to every website she could find. I also inadvertantly got sent virtually all her personal details via text spams. Name, address, DOB, pretty much everything I'd need to make her life miserable again with her new number.
I left Vodafone as a direct result and won't go back.
No problems here either. Although I refuse to use Skype, so maybe I need to put that on if I want to bork my phone. Perhaps should add I don't install a lot of "apps" (hate that word - angry birds is a game for gawds sake, not an application).
I've never used any operating system of any kind that performs better the more software you install on it.
At the unamed distributor I used to work out we got a call from a punter who'd received a batch of PC's (over 30 of them) with dud PSU's. Anyone who touched the pins got a rather nasty electric shock. What really shocked us (and him of course) was him telling us he knew it was all 30, because he'd gone round the lot sticking his finger in them.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
