posted by
martyb
on Friday October 03 2014, @01:42AM
from the just-because-the-code-once-worked-does-not-mean-it-was-right dept.
from the just-because-the-code-once-worked-does-not-mean-it-was-right dept.
Not sure of the authenticity of the MS dev claim, but this makes sense.
Reddit user "cranbourne" says:
Microsoft dev here, the internal rumours are that early testing revealed just how many third party products that had code of the form:
if (version.StartsWith("Windows 9")) {
/* 95 and 98 */
} else {
}
and that this was the pragmatic solution to avoid that.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Plausable Explanation for Leap from Windows 8 to Windows 10
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 108 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @01:53AM
For example, by setting the version string to be "Microsoft Windows 9" or "MS Windows 9".
Never underestimate the desire of butt-headed marketing folks to put their creative stamp on something at the expense of logic, good taste, etc.
(Score: 2) by jimshatt on Friday October 03 2014, @11:59AM
if (/^[^0-9]*9/.test("Wandows 9")) { alert("Windows 95 or 98!"); }
(Score: 2) by gman003 on Friday October 03 2014, @12:54PM
Windows Nine
(Score: 5, Funny) by fadrian on Friday October 03 2014, @03:18PM
Windows? Nein!
That is all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @03:38PM
I thought of that too but then the problem could be Windows NT.
(Score: 3, Informative) by dcollins on Friday October 03 2014, @03:04PM
That compounds the problem; and also doesn't work. Lots of examples of "if (osName.indexOf("9") != -1)" starting on p. 2:
https://searchcode.com/?q=if%28version%2Cstartswith%28%22windows+9%22%29 [searchcode.com]
"There is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken
(Score: 3, Funny) by frojack on Friday October 03 2014, @01:54AM
Why that's just ridiculous!!
...wait, looks at code, Facepalm. [whispers silent Thank You toward Redmond].
Old code lives forever.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Friday October 03 2014, @07:02AM
With OSX if it is more than a few years old? Well I hope you don't actually need that software because its not running...Linux? See "The Hairyfeet Challenge" on how no mainstream distro can even keep their drivers running for 5 years worth of security updates, run 10 year old software OOTB? Not a chance in hell. But with Windows you CAN run the thousands of dollars or more in software you've invested your time and money in because MSFT has you covered.
This is why there is SXS, why there is compatibility mode, why Win 7 Pro came with XP Mode, its because when you have your business relying on VERY expensive software you don't want your underlying OS to go "LOL its all about Phablets now, what do you mean you need desktop apps? That's not cool daddy-o" and leave your dick waving in the wind. In fact thinking about it the only problems I've had getting clients expensive older software to run was NOT the fault of Windows, it was the fault of the software company fucking their users, like a certain older version of Quickbooks refusing to install unless an ancient version of Flash (and ONLY that version) was installed, or one older graphics software that would crash if its temp files wrote too fast, as in faster than a typical 2002 IDE drive.
So if this is true its just one more reason why MSFT practically owns X86, because that software you buy today will be able to work tomorrow.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @07:28AM
that's not why microsoft rules the desktop
eventually you gunna od on that koolaid
it's funny that you use microsoft's nasdaq ticker... you may as well just say "i own microsoft shares"
shill much
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @11:54AM
The parent comment should not be modded Interesting. It is a pathetic personal attack with no substance.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by mcgrew on Friday October 03 2014, @03:09PM
I don't know if he holds stock, but he has said that he earns his living repairing broken Windows computers. If everyone switched to Mac and Linux he'd have to find another line of work.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @03:34PM
Despite all the jokes about the BSoD, most of the time Windows does, in fact, 'just work'. That, resistance to change, and brand familiarity are why M$ rules the desktop.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday October 04 2014, @03:48AM
Warning! Warning!
"There has been an undetectable error in your system" - my favorite Windows error message! I mean, how to they know?
But as for the claim that Windows does in fact "just work", are you serious? And of course you realize that this phrase is subject to two divergent interpretations. "Just works" as in Apple where it just works and being a mindless consumer you should not bother yourself about things like "how" it works. And "just works" as in short for "just barely works, and is about to go down in a flaming blue screen of death because of an undetectable error. See, which did you mean?
(Score: 2) by Subsentient on Friday October 03 2014, @06:21PM
Go back to ZDNet, immature OS-warrior.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Friday October 03 2014, @11:23AM
You think MS has some special magic for backward compatibility? MS is no better, and in many ways worse. For one thing, MS doesn't want users to be able to stay off the upgrade treadmill, something that is not on the agenda of open source. MS is constantly changing things, just to break old software! And they like breaking rival products. They of course claim it's all about improving Windows, but it sure is convenient how often that breaks things. Try running an old 32bit non-MS program from around 2000 on a modern Windows. Many are unstable. May work for a while, but will eventually hang or crash. And, no, compatibility mode does not always help. Nor does it always help to install a 32bit version of Windows to avoid any compatibility issues with 64bit versions. It might be that something simple will fix the problems, maybe just a recompile, but you can't do that without the source code, which you can't have. Maybe the owners could help, if they're still alive, and if you can find and contact them, and if they agree to help and don't ask for too terribly much money, and if they can help and haven't themselves lost or destroyed or forgotten the source code or other necessary knowledge.
And if that's bad, what about really old school stuff from the early 90s or earlier? A DOS program, whether 8, 16, or 32bit, really has to be run in DOS. Any Windows newer than ME can't do it. Even if it could, there are hardware issues. DOS programs had to provide their own hardware drivers. No DOS program has drivers for modern hardware, so sound or graphics had better not be necessary for those programs. DOSEMU under Linux works better for those programs, particularly for sound and graphics, than any Windows emulation mode or any native DOS on modern hardware such as FreeDOS.
(Score: 3, Informative) by strattitarius on Friday October 03 2014, @01:54PM
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @03:40PM
Very true. Back when 64-bit Windows 7 was brand new, I was in a class that used old command prompt programs to generate data on various rocket fuels at different conditions. They must have been written in the late 80's, early 90's.
Half of the students in the class couldn't use them on their shiny new laptops, but my XP laptop had no problems. For everyone else, DosBox to the rescue!
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday October 03 2014, @02:24PM
I thought I had heard that Windows 8 64-bit can't even run 16-bit Windows applications? The one definite example of which I have is Civilization II.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Friday October 03 2014, @06:19PM
You are correct. Win 8 has user select-able 16 bit support but only on a 32bit Windows 8 installation (regardless of hardware, which is why 32bit windows installations on 64bit machines are still rather common).
You can of course run those 16bit apps in a 32bit virtual machine installed on a 64bit platform.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by mcgrew on Friday October 03 2014, @03:06PM
Linux? See "The Hairyfeet Challenge" on how no mainstream distro can even keep their drivers running for 5 years worth of security updates, run 10 year old software OOTB? Not a chance in hell.
I took your challenge; you lost. I have a ten year old HP with only 750 megs of memory that someone gave me (it didn't work when I got it, a few internal cables had come loose) and had it running kubuntu flawlessly with no issues whatever. I just upgraded to the latest version, which took a single click. Why Linux? Because the hard drive had been low level reformatted and I'm not going to shell out Microsoft's ridiculous price for their underperforming and very annoying OS.
The reasons MS is king of the desktop are inertia (the reason it's on my notebook is my laziness), huge sums of advertising cash (nobody but us nerds have even heard of Linux, even when it powers their Android phone), and the fact that Apple hardware is more expensive than other computer companies, who get Windows at a ridiculously low price.
But with Windows you CAN run the thousands of dollars or more in software you've invested your time and money in because MSFT has you covered.
Yeah? Then why wouldn't FoxPro 6 run under XP? And FoxPro was an MS title by then! I find your "thousands of dollars or more in software" interesting; that's just enterprise customers. I haven't spent a dime on my Linux machine. Meanwhile I have old Windows games that simply won't run that I spent good cash buying.
that software you buy today will be able to work tomorrow.
But you said the previous paragraph that Quickbooks wouldn't work. It doesn't matter that it was Quickbook programmers that were the idiots, IT WON'T INSTALL; your investment in that program vanished when you upgraded hardware. I've never seen that crap in any Linux program.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Saturday October 04 2014, @03:28AM
Then you are ready to post the link to dropbox and Youtube RIGHT NOW yes? No? Then you are full of shit and giving us more anecdotes and the challenge states clearly, and i'l quote
" Once its installed you are no longer the system builder but THE USER, so like a windows user you are ONLY allowed to use the GUI. You then get to "enjoy the freedom" of using nothing but the GUI (because if you can't even update the thing without CLI you're no match for windows are you) of updating to current...with ubuntu that is SEVEN RELEASES, just FYI. You will film this and post it to youtube, you only have to upload the final install process of each release and a pic of the device manager showing working hardware, but the complete video should be hosted on dropbox to prove you aren't faking it. "
After all I can play the anecdote game too and I say windows NEVER gets viruses or crashes because MY Windows has never gotten a virus or crashed....isn't the anecdote game fun? Put up or STFU, lets see the links NOW, otherwise you are playing the circle of loon TM [tmrepository.com] and if you insist on trying to waste my time with TMs then your only response will be me playing TM bingo, as that is all you deserve...where are the links?.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Saturday October 04 2014, @02:42PM
Then you are ready to post the link to dropbox and Youtube RIGHT NOW yes? No?
I have more important things to do. I'm sure there are already hundreds of youtube videos of people installing Linux. However, I linked a screenshot later that should convince you.
Once its installed you are no longer the system builder but THE USER, so like a windows user you are ONLY allowed to use the GUI.
I see you haven't used KDE. The only time I ever use a CLI in Linux is if I've forgotten a root password, and if a normal Windows user loses his Admin password, he's pretty hosed and will be taking the computer to you. I've been using a couple of flavors of linux in the last decade, from Mandrake to kubuntu. KDE has had a robust management system since before I started using it. Here is a screenshot I just took. [mcgrewbooks.com] Look familiar?
In fact, that interface is easier to use than Windows Control Panel. I'd installed kubuntu dual boot on my previous computer (which was stolen when my house was burglarized, which is why I bought this one). It took me two months to figure out how to disable that damned gesture "feature" in windows... because it wasn't in Control Panel's mouse controls. It took less than two minutes with the KDE GUI interface linked.
I really can't figure out what you want your movie OF. Someone changing screen resolution or something? It works just like Control Panel only easier.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Saturday October 04 2014, @07:42PM
You asked for it by merely providing yet more FOSSie bullshit anecdotes with ZERO proof other than a screenshot that anybody can grab from Google images, so enjoy some of the top 20 TMs for wasting my time with bullshit!
shillstrolls vampires [tmrepository.com] are the "faggot!" of the FOSSie world,Taco Bell distros [tmrepository.com] is why I make the FOSSe run the challenge as no matter how many I show FAIL HARD the batshit FOSSIe will just pull a use Distro X [tmrepository.com], of course what do you expect from an OS so sad that if they hit 1% they throw a Linux party [ytmnd.com] hosted by the always classy RMS [youtube.com] who leads them in their classic song works for me [tmrepository.com] followed by their claim that
Linux is winning [tmrepository.com] or that they passed the Hairyfeet challenge while ignoring every single condition of said challenge [tmrepository.com]...hey that's you!
So feel free to waste my time with more anecdotes and I'll be happy to waste yours with more links to the highly educational TMs that your cult has inspired. If you want to take the challenge then TAKE THE CHALLENGE instead of wasting time with bullshit and anecdotes because just as you can't claim you took the ice bucket chalenge because you drank a glass of gatoraide once neither can you claim the hairyfeet challenge while ignoring every single condition of said challenge. in case you are unclear as to what the conditions are? I'll be happy to highlight them for you, just so there are no misunderstandings, I'm a nice guy that way.
Take ANY mainstream consumer oriented (not LTS, because even Ubuntu advises against mainstream users using LTS) from FIVE years ago, this simulates a 5 year typical lifecycle. This BTW is less than HALF a windows support cycle, so I'm cutting linux a break. Lets say you use Ubuntu, that would be Ubuntu 9.10 and can be downloaded from their archive. Install it on ANY PC, desktop or laptop (NOT VM as that isn't real hardware and comes with special drivers) that has a wireless card. Wireless is required because more and more mainstream users are ditching wires and nobody wants a laptop that doesn't have wireless, do they?
During this phase you are the system builder so CLI (which is usually required because Linux driver support is poor) IS ALLOWED. Once its installed you are no longer the system builder but THE USER, so like a windows user you are ONLY allowed to use the GUI. You then get to "enjoy the freedom" of using nothing but the GUI (because if you can't even update the thing without CLI you're no match for windows are you) of updating to current...with ubuntu that is SEVEN RELEASES, just FYI. You will film this and post it to youtube, you only have to upload the final install process of each release and a pic of the device manager showing working hardware complete with wireless showing WPA V2 connection, but the complete video should be hosted on dropbox to prove you aren't faking it.
BTW in case it isn't clear working hardware means WORKING HARDWARE, it does NOT mean wireless that can't use WPA, it does NOT mean a PC with no sound or VESA video, it means FULLY WORKING HARDWARE and again if you are unclear please see the highlighted areas (which you apparently didn't understand last time since you completely ignored them for more circle jerking anecdotes) as completing the challenge REQUIRES vids of the final install of each upgrade (last I checked that would be EIGHT for Ubuntu, and around SIX for most others, be sure to have room on your SD Card!) along with a 5 minute video of the end of each install showing that upon completion you could go to hardware manager and had 100% functional hardware with NO FUTZING. After all if you have to futz with the thing just to have functional drivers it isn't on the same level as Windows now is it? BTW the first Windows that passed the challenge was Win2K (RTM to EOL with ZERO failed drivers, 10 years of support) WinXP (14 years, ZERO fails) and both Vista and 7 can go from RTM to current with ZERO failures. So lets see them snappies, otherwise you are just throwing yet more bullshit, which if you want bullshit see "many eyes" (which gave us such well vetted code the world lost billions on heartbleed and will probably lose billions more on stopping the current BASHing...what quality!) or again what all the anecdotes guys like you throw around lead to, the ever popular lies [tmrepository.com], damn lies [tmrepository.com], and the tao of bullshittery. [tmrepository.com]
Oh and thanks BTW, I needed to update the challenge to highlight the main points (since so many FOSSies don't seem to be able to read and all) so I'm saving this to copypasta whenever I get another "I passed the challenge...wadda you mean proof, I'm a FOSSie!" gomer, so thanks.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Saturday October 04 2014, @08:25PM
shillstrolls vampires are the "faggot!" of the FOSSie world,Taco Bell distros is why I make the FOSSe run the challenge as no matter how many I show FAIL HARD the batshit FOSSIe will just pull a use Distro X, of course what do you expect from an OS so sad that if they hit 1% they throw a Linux party hosted by the always classy RMS who leads them in their classic song works for me followed by their claim that...
I see I've struck a nerve. I earn no money from Linux, and never have. I just use it. And again, besides using a Linux CD to rescue a friend's XP computer that he's forgotten the admin password to (I have a Linux boot CD that has no GUI and runs an XP admin password recovery program), I've been at the CLI exactly twice in ten years, and that was to reset my own root password I'd forgotten.
Sure, if you're running a Linux SERVER you're going to use a CLI, but we're talking desktops.
You said you can't configure Linux without going to the CLI. I just showed you a screenshot of my own computer, a ten year old HP running a four year old version of kubuntu. You apparently think that screenshot is a fake. Install kubuntu on your computer and see for yourself.
Installing a bluetooth dongle in the W7 notebook required installing a program from CD (that I had to copy to a thumb drive on the Linux machine because the laptop has no CD), rebooting, pluggin in the dongle, and digging through several menus.
The Linux computer? Just plug in the dongle. There's automatically an icon at the bottom right. One click and the interface is right there.
Call me a liar all you want, you've already called me a faggot which pretty much ended the conversation right there.
Go take your medication.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Sunday October 05 2014, @01:14AM
I hate cultists and liars who spread lies and bullshit and since you continue to waste time with lies, such as you saying you took a challenge without actually following a single condition of said challenge rather than waste time on another FOSSie who can't follow simple instructions, with a test that frankly ANY FUNCTIONAL OS should be able to pass trivially (and just for the record OSX, Windows, and BSD can pass the only one that can't? Linux. Surprise surprise, water is wet, news at 11) please enjoy some stale copypasta which is all you will get until you show that you have actually passed the challenge...which of course you can't since all you did was grab a shot from Google images and attach one worthless anecdote...enjoy!
How sad that even with a bug spreading through OSX there are writers pointing out that's no reason to torture yourself with Linux [computerworld.com], after all even a virus ridden OSX actually runs which is more than most distros LOL! But hey, you can always tell them they can fix it [tmrepository.com] otherwise they don't need that [tmrepository.com] right? LOL! And I noticed you just couldn't fricking resist screaming "Nigger!" which in FOSSie is done by screaming PaidMicrosoftShill [tmrepository.com], hey you think you could throw in one more FOSSie cliche please? Then I'll have a FOSSie Flush ROFL!
But if you didn't have cliches and your pathetic attempts at insults why then you might have to have an independent thought [wired.com] and realize what everybody knows [lockergnome.com] that even when MSFT put out a universally reviled OS you STILL got curb stomped [practical-tech.com], does that give you ANY clues? or all they all brainwashed by those black choppers that have been following you? Hell when the Chinese were given the choice of your "free OS" or pirating Windows they chose the latter [neowin.net] even if it meant staying on XP and using IE fricking 6, LOL! Does that ring ANY bells? A smart person would say "what are we doing wrong the other guy is doing right?" but a FOSSie who is just like a Moonie in that they blindly follow, instead says "Its all a conspiracy! They are all shills keeping the masses from true salvation!" and then you wonder why we all laugh at you [penny-arcade.com] because you DON'T Listen, you DON'T learn, and Torvalds could take a big steaming dump and hand it to you and you'd thank him for his generous gift. So enjoy that fresh bitchslapping loony, enjoy the fact that the world really doesn't care...but I do, I enjoy slapping you, it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.
BTW that is my standard FOSSies bitchslap, first time I got to use it here, you should feel proud, congrats!
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday October 06 2014, @01:29AM
I hate cultists and liars who spread lies and bullshit
That's as far as I'm reading, I see I'm being trolled. You, young man, are the God damned liar here, and you fucking know it, I'm sick of it, and your trolls are working, because you're starting to piss me off with your God damned insults. Go sell your snakeoil somewhere else.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Monday October 06 2014, @03:33AM
You are a liar and are a troll, saying you took a challenge without meeting a single condition of said challenge which makes you nothing but a liar, full stop. So keep on sucking that koolaid and recruiting with your lying, and all you will get for your lies is stale copypasta, enjoy!
Get ready, here [secunia.com] they [secunia.com] come! [secunia.com] Kinda makes that koolaid just a little bitter now, don't it? I believe in using the best tool for the job, but to say Linux is secure or better than any other complex OS is frankly bullshit. Hell I was talking to a 15 year Linux admin on one of the other sites that had gotten so sick of Linux fuckups they were going to BSD and if THAT didn't "just work" they were gonna wash their hands of FLOSS on the desktop and just go Mac.
BTW if you'd like a little more food for thought, what OS was 3 of the 4 CAs running that were compromised? take [netcraft.com] a look [netcraft.com] and see [netcraft.com]. Maybe they just had configs? Surely someone with knowledge would be safe right? Guess again [slashdot.org] and its not a fluke [slashdot.org] by any means [theregister.co.uk].
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday October 06 2014, @01:09PM
Fuck off and die, troll. You're wasting your words. How about showing a video of YOUR side rather than demanding someone else prove something?
Show me a video of you not being able to do something without the CLI. Until then, you join Ethanol-Fueled in A/N's Hall of Shame.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Monday October 06 2014, @11:08PM
If you want me to stop then stop lying to the public and making false claims to push your beliefs because THE ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of a challenge is to pass the conditions of the challenge and it just shows how much fucking koolaid you are guzzling when you think you can claim to pass a challenge without meeting a single condition. And we are supposed to take your lying ass' word for shit when you can't even follow basic instructions? Well you can take MY word for it when I say Windows never crashes and get viruses because I SAY SO...proof? What is that? Something that doesn't exist in FOSSie land according to you because you are aaaaalll so trustworthy? Well fuck you you lying POS either nut up and take the challenge or shut the fuck up and quit lying, enjoy some copypasta lying FOSSie!
shillstrolls vampires [tmrepository.com] are the "faggot!" of the FOSSie world,Taco Bell distros [tmrepository.com] is why I make the FOSSe run the challenge as no matter how many I show FAIL HARD the batshit FOSSIe will just pull a use Distro X [tmrepository.com], of course what do you expect from an OS so sad that if they hit 1% they throw a Linux party [ytmnd.com] hosted by the always classy RMS [youtube.com] who leads them in their classic song works for me [tmrepository.com] followed by their claim that
Linux is winning [tmrepository.com] or that they passed the Hairyfeet challenge while ignoring every single condition of said challenge [tmrepository.com]...hey that's you!
So feel free to waste my time with more anecdotes and I'll be happy to waste yours with more links to the highly educational TMs that your cult has inspired. If you want to take the challenge then TAKE THE CHALLENGE instead of wasting time with bullshit and anecdotes because just as you can't claim you took the ice bucket chalenge because you drank a glass of gatoraide once neither can you claim the hairyfeet challenge while ignoring every single condition of said challenge. in case you are unclear as to what the conditions are? I'll be happy to highlight them for you, just so there are no misunderstandings, I'm a nice guy that way.
Take ANY mainstream consumer oriented (not LTS, because even Ubuntu advises against mainstream users using LTS) from FIVE years ago, this simulates a 5 year typical lifecycle. This BTW is less than HALF a windows support cycle, so I'm cutting linux a break. Lets say you use Ubuntu, that would be Ubuntu 9.10 and can be downloaded from their archive. Install it on ANY PC, desktop or laptop (NOT VM as that isn't real hardware and comes with special drivers) that has a wireless card. Wireless is required because more and more mainstream users are ditching wires and nobody wants a laptop that doesn't have wireless, do they?
During this phase you are the system builder so CLI (which is usually required because Linux driver support is poor) IS ALLOWED. Once its installed you are no longer the system builder but THE USER, so like a windows user you are ONLY allowed to use the GUI. You then get to "enjoy the freedom" of using nothing but the GUI (because if you can't even update the thing without CLI you're no match for windows are you) of updating to current...with ubuntu that is SEVEN RELEASES, just FYI. You will film this and post it to youtube, you only have to upload the final install process of each release and a pic of the device manager showing working hardware complete with wireless showing WPA V2 connection, but the complete video should be hosted on dropbox to prove you aren't faking it.
BTW in case it isn't clear working hardware means WORKING HARDWARE, it does NOT mean wireless that can't use WPA, it does NOT mean a PC with no sound or VESA video, it means FULLY WORKING HARDWARE and again if you are unclear please see the highlighted areas (which you apparently didn't understand last time since you completely ignored them for more circle jerking anecdotes) as completing the challenge REQUIRES vids of the final install of each upgrade (last I checked that would be EIGHT for Ubuntu, and around SIX for most others, be sure to have room on your SD Card!) along with a 5 minute video of the end of each install showing that upon completion you could go to hardware manager and had 100% functional hardware with NO FUTZING. After all if you have to futz with the thing just to have functional drivers it isn't on the same level as Windows now is it? BTW the first Windows that passed the challenge was Win2K (RTM to EOL with ZERO failed drivers, 10 years of support) WinXP (14 years, ZERO fails) and both Vista and 7 can go from RTM to current with ZERO failures. So lets see them snappies, otherwise you are just throwing yet more bullshit, which if you want bullshit see "many eyes" (which gave us such well vetted code the world lost billions on heartbleed and will probably lose billions more on stopping the current BASHing...what quality!) or again what all the anecdotes guys like you throw around lead to, the ever popular lies [tmrepository.com], damn lies [tmrepository.com], and the tao of bullshittery. [tmrepository.com]
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday October 03 2014, @08:16PM
Sorry, but empirical testing proved that wrong even between MSWind95 and MSWind98. That was one of the reasons I started looking for alternatives. Also one of the reasons I stayed with MSWind95B for 4 years.
FWIW, I've had much better luck with Linux, even though it isn't perfect. Even there, though, closed source programs tend to die quickly. Not always, but there's a tendency. But if you use FOSS software the chances are you'll update without even noticing.
OTOH, I've gotten really annoyed by recent changes to underlying libraries. I may eventually move to Mate on some distro that doesn't use systemd. And most of the problems have been promoted by Red Hat, which has caused me to be quite sceptical of them recently, though I used to be a fan. I'm still waiting to get a good picture of systemd, but I really doubt that it's a good idea. My current plan is to move to Debian stable while things sort themselves out, and plan my next move depending on how things work out for others. (A response from the systemd maintainers of "won't fix" on a log corruption bug, however, doesn't encourage me.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Friday October 03 2014, @11:18PM
Hairy pls, i installed debian from floppies on an alphaserver and made 4 version upgrades by simple apt dist upgrades and a look at the upgrade notes. If the drivers of the RAID had probs, I would have noticed. A pity that 300W/h for idling a 1 ghz machine with one gb RAM are not economically feasible. There are driver problems with intel machines? You can bet on it, and there always will be, for commercial reasons. You want to submit to the PHB which decide when your machine is obsolete? fine. Me? nope, my 512mb single core @ 1.7ghz can work better than my nexus 7 toy.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Saturday October 04 2014, @01:50AM
Which in my experience almost never works. My old DOS and Win 9x games (mostly Command and Conquer series) run flawlessly...on Linux, with Wine. Most won't run at all under Windows XP or greater, even with compatibility mode.
At one point (back when I was mostly running Windows) I even tried installing Wine on Windows to be able to play these. Couldn't get it installed though :(
(Score: 3, Interesting) by TheRaven on Friday October 03 2014, @08:17AM
In the run-up to FreeBSD 10.0, we had to patch just about every program in the ports tree that uses autoconf, because they did a version check for a single digit version number at configure time. After identifying the host as FreeBSD 1, they'd then fail, because the software required features that weren't present back then. We automated the patch for autoconf, so any port that indicates that it uses autoconf got it applied, but I wouldn't be surprised if some software did version checks at run time too, and we just haven't found them yet...
sudo mod me up
(Score: 3, Interesting) by opinionated_science on Friday October 03 2014, @12:36PM
Yes, but because you had access to the source, you could verify that - and make fun of them.
The thing about proprietary is that we only have the word of the company what it does - and there is no liability if it is rubbish.
I would suggest FOSS carries no liability BECAUSE it is FOSS. Perhaps attaching liability to proprietary software would rationlise the IT world...
(Score: 1) by invictusvoyd on Friday October 03 2014, @01:55AM
to windoze?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @02:35AM
no
(Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Friday October 03 2014, @03:27AM
It can, because some windows api calls are simply not available in older versions of windows, and some older api calls are deprecated in newer versions.
What doesn't make sense about this story is that Microsoft wants windows 9x dead, and the story implies a certain protection of third party (and perhaps some of their own) software developers by not forcing them to make changes to their software in order to make it run on windows 9 without invoking some windows 9x api calls.
Uncharacteristically charitable viewpoint from Microsoft if you ask me, which probably suggests they have a bunch of code they don't want to fix either.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @04:02AM
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Friday October 03 2014, @11:50AM
That is probably accurate. When Windows NT 4.0 was available, Microsoft still ran code on Windows NT 3.51. When the licenses cost zero, what's the excuse for not upgrading? Compatibility? Reliability?
1702845791×2
(Score: 1) by PiMuNu on Friday October 03 2014, @04:12AM
A key reason everyone uses windows is because "my existing software works on windows". If Microsoft break a whole load of applications with a stupid API change then that logic breaks.
(Score: 2) by Jaruzel on Friday October 03 2014, @09:20AM
Yes. Windows 95 and 98 are built on 32bit extensions to the old Windows 3.1 code. Windows 2000 onwards are built on the NT kernel. For proper application developers that was a massive difference as to what API calls they had available to them. I would expect almost all largish apps from 15+ years ago to include a Windows 9x version check (although most not as stupid as something like "StartsWith('Windows 9')" )
-Jar
This is my opinion, there are many others, but this one is mine.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by c0lo on Friday October 03 2014, @01:56AM
Proposed correction
Justification: unless I'm mistaken, that and this are clearly more that one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by J053 on Friday October 03 2014, @02:11AM
and that this was the pragmatic solution to avoid that.
"this" is the subject of the subordinate clause "this was the ..."
"that" could have been left out entirely.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Friday October 03 2014, @07:21AM
If you mean the first "that," then it clarifies that "this was the pragmatic solution to avoid that" was also said by Reddit user "cranbourne", as opposed to being a separate comment by the writer.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @02:20AM
Wrong. "This" is singular. "Were" is plural.
The phrasing is "this was" and "these were". "This were" is not possible.
The original is correct. You are wrong.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by c0lo on Friday October 03 2014, @02:46AM
(would a whooosh satisfy you, sir? No?
But, say... were there be more of them, like "that this" and "this this" and "the other this" additionally.... lets throw in "these thats" too... would you be satisfied then?
And don't you ever forget, mein gute Kamerad : “Der Punkt befindet sich zwischen den umschließenden Anführungszeichen und es sollten einfache statt doppelte Anführungszeichen verwendet werden." (translation) [wikia.com]
).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @03:10AM
What's with this trend of people writing "whoosh" to try to cover up a mistake they made earlier? Come on, cut the bull. We all know you fucked up. Trying to pretend that you didn't, or that it was somehow a joke, just makes you look even stupider.
You were wrong. Just fess up to it. That's a lot more respectable than this fake "whoosh" nonsense.
(Score: 1, Troll) by c0lo on Friday October 03 2014, @03:55AM
I never imagined that this [wikia.com] (see what I did here?) would work.
Even letting aside it is a nice spring day with an easy breeze and a balmy 18 degrees and is Thanks-God-is-Friday, this thread really-really made my day.
--
Hang on, it's lunch break, let's try something else. I argue that a phasing like
is a very bad form of phrasing that thing that (or is it which better?) you actually wanted to say.
I argue it is as bad as overusing this and that or using if (version.StartsWith("Windows 9")) as a test for Win95/Win98.
So what do you think of that, Alte Kameraden?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday October 03 2014, @02:36PM
It's a programmer thing. The English rule of having the period inside the quotes doesn't make sense if the sentence didn't start inside the quotes.
2 + (3 * 4) =
vs
2 + (3 * 4 =)
sort of
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @03:53PM
You can't "whoosh" responses to your own post. To a schizophrenic, everyone is always "whoosh"ing from his perspective, but that doesn't mean he's actually making any sense.
(Score: 2) by yellowantphil on Friday October 03 2014, @05:41AM
Passing over the grammar nazis trolling other grammar nazis in this thread, I'd like to take this moment to shed a bitter tear for the subjunctive mood. If I were king, and this were my kingdom, you would be guilty of high crimes against the subjunctive.
(Score: 4, Funny) by yellowantphil on Friday October 03 2014, @05:46AM
I'm slightly amused that no one has complained about the spelling in your title yet. To wit: um [merriam-webster.com] is spelled with only one M.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday October 03 2014, @02:38PM
Not to mention "Nazi."
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @12:53PM
Troll wanted to draw attention to "Plausable", first word in the summary title, first error. Or possibly he is retarded and did not notice either.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday October 03 2014, @01:57AM
This would be a good story for April Fools day except that its probably true. I believe it because at work we still get demands from the Navy to keep the system firmware at an ancient version that randomly loses calibration data, misses sensor reads, and even stops the data collection outright on occasion. Their reason for not performing a 2-minute firmware upgrade? Because their interface software wont work if it doesnt read the proper leading number in the comms banner, even if all other formatting is exactly the same.
But why doesn't the navy just take the ten seconds to change the code? Because of all the red-tape and proofing hassles that would follow.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @02:17AM
It was an April Fools joke in 2013: http://www.infoworld.com/article/2613504/microsoft-windows/microsoft-windows-microsoft-skips-too-good-windows-9-jumps-to-windows-10.html [infoworld.com]
(Score: 2) by martyb on Friday October 03 2014, @02:30AM
Could you make a separate comms *adapter* box? Install your new system box. Then plug the adapter into it. It would take the new feed, mask out the new number, and replace it with the old number. Then connect the output of the adapter to wherever the old system was connected. They get their favorite numbers in all the right places. Not only do they get better data, but you get to drop the (costly) support of the old system. Sounds like a win-win to me. But, that seems *too* easy... what did I miss?
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Friday October 03 2014, @03:20AM
Could you make a separate comms *adapter* box?
No, that still requires signing off on a new specification. It would be much worse than the correct solution.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Darth Turbogeek on Friday October 03 2014, @03:28AM
Well.... it's most likely true because Windows 95/98 are officially known as "Windows 9x" and yes stuff like drivers do id the Windows version like the code snippet I'll show below. It's not Microsoft's fault per say and due to the sheer size of the legacy third party codebase , there's no way to cope with it. The code I see for a device driver I looked at not long ago has this for OS id
Which seems odd way because I would id the OS via kernel version. Here's another way you could see the problem being generated...
First I create a function to id the kernel, then apply it to the common Windows name
And then I run code snip 1 and grouping anything with "Windows 9" together as the Windows 9x family will give you a problem.
So.... yeah basically "Windows 9x" can quite plausibly cause a lot of issues for OS identification. I'm very sure I dont have the only example.
(Score: 2) by Popeidol on Friday October 03 2014, @07:27AM
Replying because of no modpoints.
I've trawled through a few discussions today hoping to find examples from somebody with direct experience, and you're the first person to do so. Thanks!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Friday October 03 2014, @07:38AM
I'd expect the kernel version to be the one and only thing that matters for a device driver.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1) by Darth Turbogeek on Friday October 03 2014, @12:19PM
You would think so - but for 32bit drivers, you do have some developers who are not looking at the kernel but are looking at the OS family. For 64bit..... well that error wont affect shit because of course there are no Windows 9x 64bit versions AND 64bit is more constrained about how you go about writing a driver in the first place.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @11:57AM
You replaced Java code with VB6 code?
(Score: 2) by romanr on Friday October 03 2014, @02:41AM
This is very likely real [searchcode.com].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @03:17AM
(Score: 4, Informative) by Darth Turbogeek on Friday October 03 2014, @03:43AM
Try this -
https://searchcode.com/?q=if(version%2Cstartswith(%22windows+9%22) [searchcode.com]
(Score: 1) by Squidious on Friday October 03 2014, @02:07PM
Wow over 4,000 results. Thanks for posting that.
The terrorists have won, game, set, match. They've scared the people into electing authoritarian regimes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 04 2014, @06:52PM
That's because searchcode search is loose?
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Asearchcode.com+#tbs=li:1&q=site:searchcode.com+%22startswith+windows+9%22 [google.com]
(Score: 3) by Techwolf on Friday October 03 2014, @02:49AM
A real example of that very problem with IE 10
https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-29448 [atlassian.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @03:15AM
The real problem there is that JavaScript has a superbly fucked up type system that encourages programmers to write bad code like that. That kind of programming error is much more obvious and harder to do in a real language that has even shitty type checking.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @10:01AM
Perhaps MS is more careful with this because lots of people got burned by the IE 10 issue earlier.
See: http://www.hanselman.com/blog/bugandfixaspnetfailstodetectie10causingdopostbackisundefinedjavascripterrorormaintainff5scrollbarposition.aspx [hanselman.com]
http://forums.asp.net/t/1823287.aspx?ImageButtons+not+working+in+IE10 [asp.net]
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/friis/archive/2013/12/09/making-sure-one-s-site-is-compatible-with-internet-explorer-11.aspx [msdn.com]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by lentilla on Friday October 03 2014, @02:52AM
If we are on the look-out for "pragmatic" solutions we could always make the version string "Windows 09". That would neatly sidestep:
if (version.StartsWith("Windows 9")) { /* matches 95 && 98, but not 09 */ }
(OK, that's not a serious suggestion.)
Honestly though, pragmatic solutions often beget more problems further down the track. What's worse - it's a multiplicative effect. One work-around today, is four tomorrow, is sixteen next week.
Case in point: Microsoft's Excel's epoch [joelonsoftware.com] has some special weirdness in order to work around a bug in Lotus 123. It has the effect of an avalanche: Lotus 123 got it wrong, Excel works around that, OpenOffice has to accommodate. LibreOffice and whatever comes next also. Future code has pages upon pages of legacy "exceptions to the rule" that can never be removed. Unless very well documented the day will come when a maintenance programmer simply rips it out and introduces subtle bugs that may go unnoticed until a lander crashes into a planet's surface or something like that.
I understand the lure of a pragmatic solution but often the best solution is to cut your losses. Let the blame fall with the perpetrator. Don't make the mistake of taking responsibility for old errors in perpetuity.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday October 03 2014, @04:03AM
Note to myself: before using a lander to descend to a planet (or something like that), ask if any of MS Excel or OO or LibreOffice were used to design it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by dcollins on Friday October 03 2014, @05:21AM
I want to call this specific problem 80% the fault of the lazy check-writers, and 20% the fault of Microsoft, because of their loony-tunes inability to stick with a given protocol for labeling their product (e.g. Windows 1, 2, 3, 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10, etc.). If they had stuck to naming the product by years then this wouldn't be happening now. Surely the developers couldn't predict that naming path in the future. But MS marketing had to outsmart itself a half-dozen times with cutesy renaming, and now they pay the price by looking like they can't even count from 8 to 10 properly. Kind of like IE6, it's just that the pain of the "moral hazard" only bites back on MS 10 years too late.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday October 03 2014, @09:55AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Friday October 03 2014, @12:00PM
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @04:13PM
Plus customers would see no reason to spend hundreds to upgrade from 6.1 to 6.4. It wouldn't be seen as worth it until at least the major version number increased.
At this point, they probably should try to let the version number catch up somehow to the product name number; using "Ceiling(Build Number / 100)" is just going to make it more confusing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @04:16PM
Sorry, make that "ceiling(Build Number / 1000)".
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Friday October 03 2014, @05:36AM
if(version.Contains("9")) {
:P
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday October 03 2014, @02:29PM
Unless very well documented the day will come when a maintenance programmer simply rips it out and introduces subtle bugs that may go unnoticed until a lander crashes into a planet's surface or something like that.
Or, y'know, you could just make sure the date is right and then save it in one of LO's native formats.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by dcollins on Friday October 03 2014, @03:08PM
Oh, and I noticed lots of examples of "if (osName.indexOf("9") != -1)" starting on p. 2:
https://searchcode.com/?q=if%28version%2Cstartswith%28%22windows+9%22%29 [searchcode.com]
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Friday October 03 2014, @04:00AM
Granted, it's dumb to not explicitly check for "98" and "95" but it's more dumb to accommodate such code at the expense of Windows' already silly version conventions. Would it have been that hard to just put Microsoft Windows 9 or something like that. Microsoft has always had a hardon for prefixing every single product of theirs with the company name, or is that not "streamline" enough now?
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by dcollins on Friday October 03 2014, @02:58PM
Lots of examples of "if (osName.indexOf("9") != -1)" starting on p. 2:
https://searchcode.com/?q=if%28version%2Cstartswith%28%22windows+9%22%29 [searchcode.com]
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Friday October 03 2014, @09:00PM
Fair enough, but at that point it goes beyond bad practice when checking version strings and into the territory of just bad string processing period.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Friday October 03 2014, @06:11AM
Back in late 1985 and early 1986, I used to do graveyard shift telephone tech support for Microport SystemV/AT. It was AT&T UNIX for the IBM PC/AT and its clones; while I was there we shipped our 80386 build.
Our only real competitor was the Santa Cruz Operation - back before they became just "SCO" and still had a hot tub! - but they'd been in business for a lot longer than us and so they had a higher version number.
Xenix was NOT really UNIX. It worked like UNIX but my understanding is that it was written from scratch in hopes of replacing MS-DOS. SystemV/AT was a port of AT&T's real System/V, like what they were running on VAXen and the like.
Even so, because it had been through many more releases, Xenix had a much higher version number than SystemV/AT. That's why when we issued a modest feature upgrade, we set our version number to appear to be one minor release higher the Xenix' version!
I don't recall the actual numbers but we went from something like 1.3 to 2.6, this because Xenix was at 2.5.
The problem we've got here is that Harry The Homeowner doesn't understand that version numbers are really intended to facilitate technical support, bug reporting and regression, ensuring compatibility with third-party code, major revisions, minor feature upgrades, small bug fixes &c.
No, for the most part he wants something that's got a really high version number because you know if "It Goes Up To Eleven" it must be louder.
The original Mac system software didn't really have version numbers, but from time to time word would get to me that if I brought a couple floppies down to ComputerWare, they'd give me a new version. Somewhere around System 5 they started giving it versions, with System 6 having lots of little sub-versions.
That first Mac system was released in 1984; just before System 7 in 1991 it was I think 6.5. When Mac OS X shipped in 2001 or so, it was Mac OS 9 or 9.1. So we Went two major releases in ten years.
But now we've been stuck on "Mac OS X version 10.x.x" for thirteen years! and Apple employees persist in referring to it as "Mac Oh Ess Ten" while everybody else calls it "Mac OS Ecks". When are we going to have version 11.0?
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @09:38AM
There won't be a mac os 11, unless Apple loses its way. X is ten in roman numerals. 10 in unsigned binary is 2. Two layers of indirection. (Keeps the salespeople off the engineer's backs).
Because the first version of something an engineer builds will always end up throwaway, because it will be too flawed to save.
But the second version. (if the engineer is competent and learns from all the failures in 1.x) will never again need such a fundamental change.
Hell, look at Linux - got tired of calling itself 2.6.* and just jumped to 3.x because the deep architectural alterations that would have merited an increment beyond the 2.6. in the original scheme were just never going to need to happen.
Although, maybe they should consider going to 4.0 once systemd has it so tightly bound up that including it in a distro is no longer optional. I think at that point that systemd ought to just be merged into mainline Linux, as the "non kernel-mode part of the OS".
Really, this outcome of meaningless number incrementing is just the natural result of imperfect information applied to free markets in game theory.
Just like all advertising really - ultimately wasted effort intent on undoing ignorance that exists because we aren't omnipresent.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Friday October 03 2014, @12:20PM
Historically, that was true and it was particularly acute when people wanted the fastest microprocessor clock speed. That led to completely counter-productive designs with 21 cycle pipeline stalls. However, in a market which is more conscious about security, it would be hoped that attaining the same features with a lower version number indicates higher quality code and less need to apply security updates.
1702845791×2
(Score: 3, Interesting) by cafebabe on Friday October 03 2014, @12:12PM
By Microsoft's logic, Apple should skip to version 12 to avoid confusion with X11 windowing.
Apple is very insistent on naming, spelling and capitalization. I worked on a project where Apple contractors were very insistent about written references not deviating from "iPod Touch".
1702845791×2
(Score: 2, Funny) by robpow on Friday October 03 2014, @06:12AM
Reading all the comments and other blogs has just convinced me more that this is a pure marketing gimmick and has nothing to do with lazy version checking.
MS just wanted to spring something new on the world that we didn't expect, apart from that last year's April's Fool's joke.
"Ok ok sonwe put the start button back... And Finally, it's goin to be called Windows 10!! Yeaaahhhhh!!!!"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @08:11AM
that also seems plausible
microsoft: "how do we get free marketing for the next version of windows?"... "ooh lets do something unexpected"
tech news community: "zomgwtfbbq microsoft skips release 9! buzz flutter"
microsoft: profit!
(Score: 5, Funny) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Friday October 03 2014, @08:29AM
I assumed it's because Microsoft have cottoned on to the fact that every other version of Windows sucks, with decent ones in between. By skipping from 8 to 10 they get to skip the decent one.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Friday October 03 2014, @10:10AM
But while 8 was great, 10 was terrible
And looking back years later, I found 2,3,4,6,7,8 and 9 all good films. 4 has slipped in my own rankings, and 3 has appreciated in value.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Friday October 03 2014, @12:37PM
While versions of Windows or Star Trek films may alternative between good and bad, there is a bias at each step of the sequence. If any release is above average then there is less scope for improvement. Meanwhile, more factors may conspire to lower standards. The result isn't necessarily a comb but when the contributing factors may be stateful, neither are they random, unbiased samples.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 04 2014, @11:37PM
And STAR TREK 2, 3, and 4 form a cohesive 'trilogy'.
So much so that Vonda N. McIntyre's novelizations of the three films were re-printed in a single volume ten years ago in 2004 (now out of print but still available new from 3rd party sellers through Amazon).
Star Trek: Signature Edition: Duty, Honor, Redemption
http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Signature-Edition-Redemption/dp/0743496604 [amazon.com]
This would not have happened if Chekov was killed off in the first film as originally planned or if Spock stayed dead at the end of the second film.
(Score: 1) by Cognizant on Friday October 03 2014, @10:24AM
I cant mod you up because we seem to be stuck in the "good ole boys club" rules but I wanted you to know that it was funny as hell to me.
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Friday October 03 2014, @02:12PM
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday October 03 2014, @02:32PM
Heck, it seems to me that I have to post *that day* to get my mod points to activate. And I post almost daily. Something about the system figuring out when you're active, supposedly?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by tathra on Friday October 03 2014, @04:27PM
more likely you're just sleeping through when you get mod points. when i woke up today, i had like an hour left on my mod session and only got to spend 2 points. at first i thought the same thing you're thinking, but i've hopped on and seen my moderation time having started hours earlier far too many times now.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday October 03 2014, @05:08PM
No, I've logged in in the morning, not had mod points, posted a few comments, and ten minutes later had mod points.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by tathra on Friday October 03 2014, @06:10PM
well yeah, i've had that happen too. i've also not posted and gotten mod points 20 minutes later, and i've also logged in with my moderation period almost finished. i'm saying it just seems to be random when they're distributed, based on what i've seen with my account. with only an 8 hour moderation period, unless you're checking throughout the whole day, you're likely to miss some of your moderation periods.
i've seen suggestions that a person's moderation times should be based on when they're active, but i have no idea how it actually works. at any rate, 8 hours isn't nearly long enough; 12 hours would make it harder to miss your mod period.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @08:54AM
"Plausable Explanation for Leap from Windows 8 to Windows 10"
Gee I dunno, how bout more attention from the press?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @09:59AM
Until you realize Windows reports a proper version number and build if queried, these names are product names concocted by marketing and little else.
(Score: 1) by blackpaw on Friday October 03 2014, @02:29PM
Exactly, sounds like cutsey bollocks to me. When querying the windows version in code you don't get a string.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Bot on Friday October 03 2014, @10:18AM
Account abandoned.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @12:32PM
These are the version numbers available to the USER, and are damned right...and you are trying to tell us that the version number available to PROGRAMMERS is a different, wrong one?
(Score: 3, Funny) by dcollins on Friday October 03 2014, @12:43PM
That was my first instinct, too, but the code search posted above convinced me otherwise. Here it is again:
https://searchcode.com/?q=if(version%2Cstartswith(%22windows+9%22) [searchcode.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @03:19PM
No one uses Windows ME?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Alfred on Friday October 03 2014, @04:02PM
They provided an update from OS X 10.4.9 to 10.4.10 which broke some software. Some apps did minimum OS requirement checking with bad parsing and read 10.4.10 as 10.4.1 so the software thought it was an older OS than it was and wouldn't run. You had to roll back to 10.4.9 or wait for 10.5 or wait for the app vendor to release an update.
Wasn't a huge widespread problem but an amusing hiccup. Most software was fine.
And just remember, fanboys, to add that to your list of Apple "firsts."