SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Speaking to Windows Weekly, Microsoft Marketing chief Chris Capossela explained that users who choose Windows 7 do so “at your own risk, at your own peril” and he revealed Microsoft has concerns about its future software and hardware compatibility, security and more.
[...] There’s only one problem with Capossela’s statements: they are complete rubbish. Windows 7 is no less secure than Windows 10 (it will be supported until 2020) and no less compatible with new hardware and software. In fact its far greater market share means it is developers’ priority and has greater compatibility with legacy programmes and peripherals. If Fallout 4 won’t run on your Windows 7 computer, it will be upgrading your components not installing Windows 10 which fixes that.
As for fragmentation, the only issue that creates is for Microsoft and its target of getting one billion devices running Windows 10 within 2-3 years of release.
Original article from Forbes. Article is behind annoying ads and JavaScript.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Marand on Monday January 04 2016, @10:16PM
That comment at the end got me curious about what makes the Forbes site's JS and ads more annoying than normal? So I went, and goddamn, was it right.
I couldn't view the site at all in Firefox with NoScript, just got a blank page. So I tried in Chromium and it whined about me having Adblock, asking me politely to disable it. It sounded optional so I ignored it, hit continue, and it brought me back to a similar page complaining that I still haven't turned it off yet and with a timer that prevented clicking the continue button to be sure I read it. (Oh, and a an ironic and smart-assed quote* about perseverance being doing the same thing over and over until it eventually works.) Tried clicking through expecting it to load the page, but nope, it just kept perpetually dropping me back to the same quote-and-continue-timer button because something was completely broken
No way in hell I'm going to disable Chromium's adblock, so I tried again in Firefox, allowing just forbes.com and its image host urls, thinking maybe that would work. Nope, still thinks I'm using an ad blocker and whines because I didn't enable the 9 or 10 third-party domains too. Though, after whining, it actually did properly load ad-free in Firefox, so I went to see why Chromium was failing...
It turns out that, not only does the site harass you for using adblock, it also doesn't work properly if you use Chromium's incognito mode. Good job, Forbes, you made your site completely unusable and I'll never be visiting again. 10/10, would close tab again.
* The quote was "Perseverance is failing 19 times and succeeding the 20th"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 04 2016, @10:27PM
yeah forbes has been fucked for almost a year now
even more annoying is that the text of the story is usually there in the html, it just won't show it without javascript
makes me wonder if someone has come up with a greasemonkey script to fix it
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2016, @01:34AM
Disable CSS (View > Page Style > No Style) - If you're using one of those fugly modern menu-less browsers good luck finding the place to toggle that.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Monday January 04 2016, @10:29PM
Hmmm, I had no such problems.
Running Chromium on Manjaro with Ublock Origin, the Forbes site stopped on the continue to site page, and one click later I was at the page (with 23 blocked trackers and ads indicated by Ublock.
So I went to the link "xpda" mentioned, and I arrived instantly at the networkworld site with 24 blocked ads/trackers.
It seems the Forbes site uses some sort of algorithm to determine who it is going to pick on today.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by xpda on Monday January 04 2016, @10:41PM
I went to the networkworld link and only had one address blocked by uBLock Origin. Then I thought to enable JavaScript: 40 blocked.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Tuesday January 05 2016, @12:20AM
You must be using the default settings for Ublock Origin.
You should step to Third party filters tab and turn on everything in the first group except the expirimental,
Then for Ads, everything except the tirst and 4th
In Privacy all bur first and play with third.
Malware - pick the defaults.
Also under Social, I run some of Fanboy's filters, just to get rid of the stupid facebook buttons.
Ublock was never really meant to be run out of the box. You are supposed to expiriment with it a bit.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by xpda on Tuesday January 05 2016, @03:56AM
I only use the uBlock filters (except Experimental), and a bunch under "my filters" including cosmetic filters. The eyedropper tool is really handy for Facebook ads, flyovers, and animated slideshows.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday January 05 2016, @04:20AM
And that's why Ublock doesn't work for you.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by xpda on Tuesday January 05 2016, @04:51AM
Actually, it works great! I am happy to get a blank page on Forbes in exchange for a readable web.
(Score: 2) by Marand on Monday January 04 2016, @10:54PM
Hmmm, I had no such problems.
Running Chromium on Manjaro with Ublock Origin, the Forbes site stopped on the continue to site page, and one click later I was at the page (with 23 blocked trackers and ads indicated by Ublock.
I think you missed the line at the end where I said I had Chromium in incognito, which turned out to be the cause of the infinite loop. Viewing the page outside of icnognito worked as expected, with a nag and then continue. I only rarely use Chromium for misbehaving pages and the like, so all it has is adblock. Made it pretty easy to figure out that Incognito mode was breaking the site further and turning it off confirmed it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 04 2016, @11:51PM
Oftentimes, a site refuses to cooperate with me. I just go into a VM, and C/P the address into an unprotected browser. It loads, I read, I close the browser, and delete cookies and crap. I don't do it very often, but now and then, I feel a need to read the article. Usually I come away wondering why I bothered.
(Score: 5, Informative) by xpda on Monday January 04 2016, @10:31PM
I got a blank page, too! I'm glad to see it wasn't just my version of Firefox.
Forbes.com has made two strategic blunders recently. First, they block web traffic that doesn't conform to their rules. Traffic that doesn't see ads is still very valuable, as it could earn Forbes a link in Soylent News or even 4Chan. Second, their site is now full of clickbait headlines attached to information-deficient articles. They have thrown away any competitive advantage they once had with the name "Forbes".
http://www.networkworld.com/article/3018879/microsoft-subnet/microsoft-exec-makes-bizarre-claims-against-windows-7.html [networkworld.com]
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Tuesday January 05 2016, @12:18AM
Thank you for that link which also contains a link to an audio of the interview. All it takes is a bit of google-fu. I guess the poster and the editors all subscribe to Forbes which is in all likelihood plagiarized from Network World.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 3, Informative) by martyb on Tuesday January 05 2016, @09:59AM
I can understand this conclusion based on your perspective, but it is misinformed. Here is a summary of some of the steps that I took:
Saw this story come up in our #rss-bot channel on IRC [soylentnews.org]. Looked interesting and wanted to submit it, myself.
Went to look at the article, encountered the same adblock warning as others have posted here. Got a blank page (thanks to NoScript). Permitted forbes.com and forbesimg.com — saw that it required another bunch of domains to be enabled, none of which I wanted to permit on my system. Had run into this on forbes.com before, had no interest in going down that rat hole again.
Spent well over a half hour searching for other coverage of this story. No joy, as the story had *just* gone up. Punted on the idea of submitting the story.
Next, saw that an AC had submitted this story. There wasn't much to go from (follow the Original Submission [soylentnews.org] link.) Performed another search and found some coverage. As I had not seen the Forbes story, I could not tell if they were the same. Made a note on the submission for the other editors:
Submission was picked up by another editor and queued to go out as a story on the main page. (Above comments made to the submission got dropped (possible bug) when the submission was promoted to be a story.)
NOTE: The story was originally posted at Forbes, it was not until *after* it had been queued out as a story here that it finally gained coverage at network world.
tl;dr: It was a real eye-opener when I became an editor for this site and saw how much more happens "behind the scenes" to get a story out. There is MUCH more here than meets the eye! Hopefully the foregoing has given some idea of what is involved and a new perspective on which to base conclusions in the future.
(Please pardon any typos / errors — it's barely 0500 and I need to go back to bed.)
Wit is intellect, dancing.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday January 05 2016, @02:36PM
A lot of stories these days are sourced from the Soylent rss-bot [sylnt.us]. Forbes starting showing up a lot a month ago or so, but there are other sources there, too. Check 'em out. If you see something good, copy & paste representative paragraphs in <blockquote> </blockquote> tags, put a title & category on it, and submit it. You can do more than that, of course, but doing the aforementioned is easy and takes under 5 minutes.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2016, @04:51PM
also "drupal" has a built-in RSS-feed FETCHER (it has a built-in RSS feed MAKER too).
just find some atom/RSS link on some newsworthy website, example: http://feeds.reuters.com/ReutersPictures [reuters.com]
put that link into drupal and set it to reload and drupal-fy the data.
(here is reuters RSS category overview link: http://www.reuters.com/tools/rss) [reuters.com]
of course you never know if somebody hijacks the RSS-feed providing website and then "makes the RSS data
go bad" in the mouth of unsuspecting drupal ^_^"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by TheGratefulNet on Monday January 04 2016, @11:06PM
if I have to try more than 3 times to see a page by unraveling my blockers, I will give up and not try again.
I take it as a sign of 'we are evil' and so I don't worry about not going there.
no big deal. some sites are obnoxious in how their 'code' runs. fuck them - if that's how they want to be, I want no part of them, so the feeling is mutual.
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 2) by Marand on Monday January 04 2016, @11:14PM
Yeah, I'm the same way, though you may be slightly more forgiving than I normally am. If I had hit that page on a search or linked from another page I would have just closed the tab as soon as I saw that it displayed nothing with NoScript enabled. I do not tolerate sites that can't at least display some useful text when JS is disabled.
The only reason I even bothered this time is I was curious how bad it was that it got a special notice at the end.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday January 05 2016, @01:57PM
An internet generation ago if you ran into a flash based website you knew it was trash and best avoided. The clickbait of its era.
Today, same story, but for extensive javascript and tracking. If Ghostery lists more than 30 blocked items, just skip that page, its worthless.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2016, @12:48AM
> ...I didn't enable the 9 or 10 third-party domains too...
Actually, the number of third-party domains is 19.
Amazon Associates - Advertising, Affiliate Marketing
Brightcove - Widgets, Video Player
ChartBeat - Analytics
DoubleClick - Advertising
Gigya Social Analytics - Analytics
Google Tag Manager - Widgets, Tag Manager
Gravatar - Widgets
LiftDNA - Advertising
Media.net - Advertising
Moat - Advertising
Pinterest - Widgets, Social
RevContent - Advertising
Sailthru Horizon - Beacons
ScoreCard Research Beacon - Beacons, Analytics
ShareThrough - Advertising
SimpleReach - Beacons
TRUSTe Notice - Privacy
Twitter Button - Widgets, Social
Yieldbot - Beacons
This is insane, but no worse than most of the mainstream web these days...
(Score: 2) by Marand on Tuesday January 05 2016, @01:15AM
Oh wow, that's even more insane. My estimate came from what NoScript was showing as allowable domains. I guess Ghostery killed most of the crap before NS even got a chance to list it.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2016, @02:39AM
Story archived @https://archive.is/kLyAB [archive.is]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 10 2016, @03:55PM
451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 05 2016, @02:05PM
While I don't mean to defend their behavior, it worked fine for me on Firefox with Noscript and Adblock when I temporarily allowed forbes.com and forbesimg.com and left everything else disallowed. Perhaps you were letting too MUCH of their scripting through that was whining about adblock?
(Score: 2) by Marand on Tuesday January 05 2016, @09:15PM
That was what worked in firefox for me, as well; that's what tipped me off that chromium's infinite loop was probably something else. As it turns out, the biggest problem was chromium's incognito combined with adblock. (chromium uses nothing else since it's my backup.)
I doubt it is a deliberate decision (though the adblock nagging is, so maybe) rather it's probably just a side effect of the idiotic site design. It doesn't happen often, but I've encountered a few sites in the past that behave strangely with incognito but never cared enough to to find out why.