Comments on: Vista steals the show
Gates tries to sell The Daily Show's Jon Stewart on the new operating system, as Office takes a backseat.
Most Popular
Latest tech news headlines
- Apple pulls iPhone app that upset Hollywood
January 3, 2010 12:20 PM PST
- Intel Atom chip spawns Toshiba, Gateway Netbooks
January 3, 2010 12:10 PM PST
- China arrests thousands in Web porn crackdown
January 2, 2010 6:26 PM PST
- See all headlines
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
- Markets
Related quotes
Stewart warned Gates upfront that he was not exactly a technofile.
It should be "technophile" not "technofile".
Stewart warned Gates upfront that he was not exactly a technofile.
It should be "technophile" not "technofile".
Unlike you, I don't want to pay $2 per update, I also don't want to wait 5 years for them to plug in a hole in Quicktime. I also don't like companies installing rootkits in my pc, like the one with iPod.
Safe and secure... and Macs use Firefox... How much safer and securer (err.. more secure) than a Vista-running machine also using Firefox?
KM
installed on there computers and If i had to wait 5 years to really
get the windows hole patch with again an outdated OS I would have
switched to the company that can be proud to say : Still no
virusses!
Mac OS X's core security comes from its open-source kernel, - i can't comment on vista's new security as I haven't used it yet - but it has little to do with Firefox.
Your comment about ipod rootkits is equally less informed, and i'm amazed to see someone actually commenting on slow security turnarounds and then using MS as the comparative example.
Vista i'm sure will be good, but i think maybe you should take off those blinkers and actually read something about the state of the tech world before you make another inane comment like that.
me, I'm not saying you are misinformed or incorrect, I'm flat out
saying you are stupid.
wait to plug one hole, agains five years to plug tens of
thousands.
Complaining about a rumored $2 fee that will never happen.
And a mac with a firefox vulnerability is far safer then windows
since firefox can't gain root priviledges while you don't neet root
priviledges to wreck havoc on Windows.
and the beat goes on ....
Unlike you, I don't want to pay $2 per update, I also don't want to wait 5 years for them to plug in a hole in Quicktime. I also don't like companies installing rootkits in my pc, like the one with iPod.
Safe and secure... and Macs use Firefox... How much safer and securer (err.. more secure) than a Vista-running machine also using Firefox?
KM
installed on there computers and If i had to wait 5 years to really
get the windows hole patch with again an outdated OS I would have
switched to the company that can be proud to say : Still no
virusses!
Mac OS X's core security comes from its open-source kernel, - i can't comment on vista's new security as I haven't used it yet - but it has little to do with Firefox.
Your comment about ipod rootkits is equally less informed, and i'm amazed to see someone actually commenting on slow security turnarounds and then using MS as the comparative example.
Vista i'm sure will be good, but i think maybe you should take off those blinkers and actually read something about the state of the tech world before you make another inane comment like that.
me, I'm not saying you are misinformed or incorrect, I'm flat out
saying you are stupid.
wait to plug one hole, agains five years to plug tens of
thousands.
Complaining about a rumored $2 fee that will never happen.
And a mac with a firefox vulnerability is far safer then windows
since firefox can't gain root priviledges while you don't neet root
priviledges to wreck havoc on Windows.
and the beat goes on ....
to do the work? I can understand that he fixes the car or does the
jobs that are hefty but is Windows still that dificult that an
experienced man needs to install it?
Mr. Ballmer didn't say that Mrs. Ballmer finds it "to (sic) difficult" to install. He said that she has a rule about not installing beta software on her PC.
She sounds like a sensible woman -- unlike millions of others who ignore warnings about using beta software on mission-critical PCs, and then moan and groan because something isn't working properly.
how bright can she be. Maybe inserting a DVD and clicking start
are a little outside her abilities. You geeks can no doubt handle that
though, right? Well at least in a group effort, right? No.... oh.
to do the work? I can understand that he fixes the car or does the
jobs that are hefty but is Windows still that dificult that an
experienced man needs to install it?
Mr. Ballmer didn't say that Mrs. Ballmer finds it "to (sic) difficult" to install. He said that she has a rule about not installing beta software on her PC.
She sounds like a sensible woman -- unlike millions of others who ignore warnings about using beta software on mission-critical PCs, and then moan and groan because something isn't working properly.
how bright can she be. Maybe inserting a DVD and clicking start
are a little outside her abilities. You geeks can no doubt handle that
though, right? Well at least in a group effort, right? No.... oh.
Goodbye CNET!
There are plenty of other news sites to visit that give neutral opinions in their stories... and you don't have to read replies from their readers who, in the end, can only voice their opinions among Microsoft hating friends because of their collective insecurities.
On the users comments, every article is turned into Microsoft is evil (so 1997) and Macinpoop is from God (1984), even those that have nothing to do with either company. CNET encourages this with it's editor policies of how articles are written - it not only loves Macinturd, it loves it when fanatical jihad Al-Apple and Osama Bin Jobs' followers come on to comment.
feeds were included in the basic set of bookmarks. CNET's RSS
feed is among them. My guess is that a lot of Mac users end up
here because of that, making the proportion of Mac visitors to
the site much higher than the proportion of Mac users overall.
Long-time readers might remember that CNET used to be quite
biased against the Mac. CNET no doubt noticed a significant
increase in Mac traffic following the release of Safari RSS. The
anti-Mac bias has changed, though I certainly would not say that
the site is now "pro-Mac."
Another side effect is a significant increase in Mac headlines,
many of them inflamatory, that draw in Mac traffic through the
RSS feed.
Goodbye CNET!
There are plenty of other news sites to visit that give neutral opinions in their stories... and you don't have to read replies from their readers who, in the end, can only voice their opinions among Microsoft hating friends because of their collective insecurities.
On the users comments, every article is turned into Microsoft is evil (so 1997) and Macinpoop is from God (1984), even those that have nothing to do with either company. CNET encourages this with it's editor policies of how articles are written - it not only loves Macinturd, it loves it when fanatical jihad Al-Apple and Osama Bin Jobs' followers come on to comment.
feeds were included in the basic set of bookmarks. CNET's RSS
feed is among them. My guess is that a lot of Mac users end up
here because of that, making the proportion of Mac visitors to
the site much higher than the proportion of Mac users overall.
Long-time readers might remember that CNET used to be quite
biased against the Mac. CNET no doubt noticed a significant
increase in Mac traffic following the release of Safari RSS. The
anti-Mac bias has changed, though I certainly would not say that
the site is now "pro-Mac."
Another side effect is a significant increase in Mac headlines,
many of them inflamatory, that draw in Mac traffic through the
RSS feed.
Desktop Search as it is used today was really
first attempted (and failed) by Oracle who tried
to do it with IFS (which worked for a networked
filesystem and ignored the desktop). At about
the same time, Google and several other offered
simple desktop search engines and Linux
developers came up with various approaches from
file-system extensions to background indexers.
The modern desktop search with local
plugin-based metadata extraction and indexing
was first demonstrated in Linux with Beagle (and
a couple of other engines) then quickly followed
up with Spotlight. Microsoft's own internal
memos note that they had promised but failed to
deliver the feature which, in the meantime had
been delivered by others -- spurring them to
introduce the desktop search in Vista (which is
considerably less ambitious than the original
plan and still doesn't function quite as well as
Apple's Spotlight).
Actually Beagle is probably the best if only
from it's relatively simple and elegant
implementation. It's written in Mono-compatible
C#, so it could easily be ported to Windows and
Mac.
- Desktop search
- by TanNg January 31, 2007 4:35 PM PST
- Do you know who have desktop search first? Many desktop search applications are running on Windows 2000, XP. Apple just copy it into their OS. Search concept also showed in prototype of Longhorn before OS X appear. So, this is not a trust, this is a lie. Ten company desktop search application and CNET dont talk about this, but when Google come out with GDS CNET was chanting "Innovation", when Apple copy it to their OS, CNET and Apple user are shouting "breakthrough innovation". And you call this trust.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- Hilarios
- by Clues January 31, 2007 7:46 PM PST
- Anybody else living in that reality?
- Like this
-
- MS not innovative here...
- by FellowConspirator February 1, 2007 1:50 PM PST
- The notion of "desktop search" is pretty old.
- Like this
-
(70 Comments)Desktop Search as it is used today was really
first attempted (and failed) by Oracle who tried
to do it with IFS (which worked for a networked
filesystem and ignored the desktop). At about
the same time, Google and several other offered
simple desktop search engines and Linux
developers came up with various approaches from
file-system extensions to background indexers.
The modern desktop search with local
plugin-based metadata extraction and indexing
was first demonstrated in Linux with Beagle (and
a couple of other engines) then quickly followed
up with Spotlight. Microsoft's own internal
memos note that they had promised but failed to
deliver the feature which, in the meantime had
been delivered by others -- spurring them to
introduce the desktop search in Vista (which is
considerably less ambitious than the original
plan and still doesn't function quite as well as
Apple's Spotlight).
Actually Beagle is probably the best if only
from it's relatively simple and elegant
implementation. It's written in Mono-compatible
C#, so it could easily be ported to Windows and
Mac.