|
all your files are belong to us
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft originally launched its subscription version of Office back in September 2012, but the company is announcing a new cheaper option for individuals today. "This time, it's personal"
|
|
|
|
|
But I don't understand.
I have office. Granted it doesn't have the moniker 365 anywhere but gee, it writes calculates, gets email and I don't have to give anyone anything yearly.
Boggles the mind why anyone would do this.
Office have been mature since 03 and only messed up serious since then anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Ron Anders wrote: Boggles the mind why anyone would do this.
Uh, because sooner or later Microsoft will force everyone to do it?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody will be able to force me to do anything.
modified 13-Mar-14 21:18pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The 2001 agile manifesto was an attempt to replace rigid, process and management heavy, development methodologies with a more human and software-centric approach. They identified that the programmer is the central actor in the creation of software, and that the best software grows and evolves organically in contact with its users. "The lunatics have taken over the asylum"
|
|
|
|
|
...but - do you not remember how bad it was? I remember a project from the late 90s that went from a 6 month to 18 month delivery cycle.
Now - Agile didn't deliver Nirvana because (a) it never promised to be cheaper but every CFO thought that it did and (b) it wasn't compatible with massive outsourcing and re-organising that the stuffed shirt layer were doing concurrently.
|
|
|
|
|
And a cookie! Agile promised me a COOKIE!
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
I got a promised a cookie too - it never got out of the backlog though.
|
|
|
|
|
That's quite a funny article, but you can summarise it in one line:
"Don’t put non-technical managers in charge of software developers."
|
|
|
|
|
The JavaScript founder also says the language is approaching its endgame: performance parity with native code. This is my script. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.
|
|
|
|
|
Brace yourself for an exhaustive rundown of Google's master plan and the company's ultimate goal. "I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."
|
|
|
|
|
In a new interview with Rolling Stone, Microsoft Founder Bill Gates dropped a few tech tidbits, including that Microsoft 'was willing to buy' WhatsApp. He's also no Edward Snowden fan (no surprise). Getting a little teary eyed here. I missed you, man!
|
|
|
|
|
In start-up land, the young barely talk to the old (and vice versa). That makes for a lot of cool apps. But great technology? Not so much. Innovate this.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
I'm hoping HBO's upcoming "Silicon Valley" calls them on a lot of this sh*t.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting article.
|
|
|
|
|
It took a lot of work to get developers and IT ops people to collaborate. The next step: getting them to factor in security at the beginning of the process. "Maybe, perhaps, yes!"
|
|
|
|
|
Learn relativity from PBS host Brian Greene now. Come back later for biology. The site has momentum
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft is expected to give away a Windows desktop version of OneNote for free, report both ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley and The Verge's Tom Warren. It's the Netscape-killer strategy. 1:release free version 2:kill competition 3:stop development 4:profit?
|
|
|
|
|
Google's new Cordova-based toolchain lets you develop hybrid mobile apps from the same HTML, JavaScript, and CSS code as Chrome apps. Write once, run on more than one place
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps Windows 8.2, a.k.a. Threshold, will rear its head? Or could Microsoft abandon the debacle of Windows 8 altogether and give us Windows 9 instead? That's certainly been one of the recent rumours. Mostly rumours, but hey, it's a slow news day
|
|
|
|
|
I think it will be Windows 8.2, The last OS core change was Windows Vista, and the previous one before that was Windows 2000, so if this is truly a core change, then the internal number should be 6.3 with Windows 9 being the seventh generation of Windows.
Free your mind and the rest will follow,
Don't be colorblind, don't be so shallow!
|
|
|
|
|
It's already 6.3 for Windows 8.1. And it's unlikely they'll change the major version for a long time to come after they faced so many problems with app compatibility (because people were implementing the algorithms to check for the OS version number wrong) when they did with Vista. That's one of the reasons Windows 7 didn't end up as 7.0 and became 6.1 instead.
I think the next version will be Windows 9 because I can imagine they want to release something that diversifies it from 8. Either that, or something completely different. How about Windows NT 6.4?
|
|
|
|
|
When I think of a version change from 6.3 to 7.0, that means the file system and/or kernel changed, not the UI or the HAL. Windows 9 I believe will be more like 8.1 except the Desktop is enabled on non-touch and Metro/Modern is enabled on touch. Also, Modern apps can/will be made to run in Desktop mode with some windowing based on operation mode.
I also expect Windows RT, if it sticks around, to include a Hyper-V/VMWare type of client to run apps going back at least to Win Vista. The ecosystem otherwise is quite lacking.
Free your mind and the rest will follow,
Don't be colorblind, don't be so shallow!
|
|
|
|
|
The kernel actually changes with every Windows release, especially for Windows 8 when they tweaked it for the new app model. The important question is: Was it a big change or not. Incrementing the major version between XP and Vista was quite reasonable because the changes were quite big. Incrementing the minor version number for Windows 7 and 8 was reasonable too as they essentially build on the work they've done in Vista and there were not big architectural changes. Well, now incrementing the minor version again for Windows 8.1 is not so reasonable to me as I assume the changes to the kernel were more of a service pack like fashion, and the bigger changes were all in the UI. But since Microsoft is not doing service packs anymore, they had to release a new version of Windows which essentially is just an update to Windows 8. You can even tell from simple things like the branding that remained unchanged.
One could go one with this all day long, but in fact it's just numbers and everybody has it's own opinion on them. I agree with you that Windows 9 (or whatever the branding will be) will be more like what 8.1 was to 8.0, hence we can expect it to be another minor release internally.
What I'd really love to see was if they split the new app model into two flavors - a consumer-oriented one that works just like the one today, and a professional-oriented one that replaces Win32 on the desktop, opens up the native XAML stack for windowed applications etc. and removes the deployment limitation via the Windows Store (some kind of sideloading by default, if you will). UI-wise, this would end up in two different versions of Windows in the future: One that is consumer-oriented and touch-optimized, with the Modern shell as the only UI and no Desktop (just like Windows RT today), and a professional/enterprise version without the Modern shell and a "reimagined" Desktop with its new app model flavor; which would be used for content creation, in production environments, and building apps for the consumer version (with an emulator like for Windows Phone). Of couse, that separation between consumer/professional won't happen as Microsoft went the route of "one size fits all" - a bold step but IMO one that can't really work out without compromises in both sides (all that "non-compromises" talk in the early days of Windows 8 was just talk with a specific perspective on the product, but nothing that worked out well in the real world).
|
|
|
|