| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Why the 'Mojave Experiment' Fails | |
|
||
| Time: 23:38 EST/04:38 GMT | News Source: Microsoft Watch | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
Joe Wilcox: The "Mojave Experiment" is conceptually a fresh marketing effort—at least for such a lame marketer as Microsoft. But after looking more closely at Mojave and reviewing Microsoft Watch reader comments, I have to call the experiment perhaps the worst kind of marketing.
| ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 354 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:12:22 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 8556 (12.206.195.4) at 7/31/2008 8:47:04 AM |
|
The owner of a company I work for is an Apple fan. He and his wife each have a new Mac. Last week he picked up an HP notebook with 64-bit Vista and 4-GB of RAM to replace his aging Windows XP work notebook. His comment to me this week was "Vista isn't so bad. It just works." When asked how it compares to his Apple Leopard Notebook, he stated that they are pretty similar performance-wise, even though his Mac has a 2.4-GHz C2D while the HP has a 2.0-GHz C2D processor. Both have 4-GB of RAM. He likes Vista.
There you have it. Someone with no previous experience with Vista, that had only heard bad things about it, actually likes it. |
| #2 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/31/2008 10:56:49 AM |
|
lame. Joe first offer faint praise for the effort... then the next day panders to his tiny flock of ABM'ers...
Bloggers/tech Journalists are like politicians... being driven by poll numbers and little sticks in their backs like cheap dime-store toys. |
| #3 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/31/2008 2:34:42 PM |
|
#2: That's the natural reaction when presented with something that you then think about later. He initially thought it was good, but upon reflection changed his mind. Now, I know from years of the Bush administration that it's essentially cowardice to change your opinion in the face of new information, but it's smart where I come from.
Another interesting link: http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/columns/article.php/3762326/Whats+Wrong+With+Microsofts+Mojave+Experiment?.htm This post was edited by Latch on Thursday, July 31, 2008 at 14:36. |
| #4 By 92283 (142.32.208.234) at 7/31/2008 3:00:06 PM |
|
#3 I believe Latch that you are the pinnacle of "inability to change your opinion in the face of new information".
Cowardice -- cutting and running when the going gets tough -- is something Bush didn't do, but all of the Dems wanted to do. And now they proclaim it a virtue to pretend to change their minds long after the victory has occurred. But in reality, they still want to surrender. This post was edited by NotParkerToo on Thursday, July 31, 2008 at 15:00. |
| #5 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/31/2008 3:21:08 PM |
| #4: I love it when you respond to my posts with nonsense as it always bolsters my position. You know... If parkkker disagrees with me, I must be right. |
| #6 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/31/2008 3:38:49 PM |
|
Latch, don't confuse things...
Two different things here... one cannot apply the same rules to "tactics" as you do "strategy" - there's a huge difference. Still.. different matter here.... |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 7/31/2008 3:56:35 PM |
|
#6: Latch, don't confuse things...
What am I confusing? Two different things here... one cannot apply the same rules to "tactics" as you do "strategy" - there's a huge difference. What? Still.. different matter here.... Again, what? |
| #8 By 92283 (142.32.208.234) at 7/31/2008 4:55:47 PM |
| #5 You love beclowning yourself when your usual Bush bashing blows up in your face? |
| #9 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/31/2008 5:02:14 PM |
|
Gosh almighty...
For those like the author and Latch that have been out of town since Nov. 2003, Vista fundamentally changed: Security and the context that any code - application, driver, or otherwise, could execute and underwhich authority. As substantively, Vista changed: The driver model for video The driver model for audio The networking stack Memory schedulers and management The industry sat on its collective backside for whatever reasons This well known set of factors resulted in gaps in coverage and compatibility two years ago. That situation has changed and the platform is well supported now. "Mojave" reflects the here and now... vice what was and what drove perceptions. Now... Latch may crawl back under his rock of choice and pretend otherwise. |
| #10 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 7/31/2008 5:08:23 PM |
|
In case it isn't obvious... my post at #9, deal with Vista and has dork, and as little to do with war fighting tactics, or global war on terror strategy as my post at #2 did.
If you want to know our global war strategy is.. here it is and it is simple and most consistent: The United States brings the fight to the enemy, away from its own shores and onto ground of its choosing. That is the strategy and it works. The "tactics" used change constantly - they are folded into campaigns that are "consistent" with the strategy - that is called "Commnder's Intent" Oh... and we're sweet enough to also keep the fighting out of the countries who are our friends... so in that context, Latch, you and Canada are "welcome" - as are Germany, France, Australia, Japan, New Zeland, Poland, etc... etc.... etc... |
| #11 By 3653 (65.80.181.153) at 7/31/2008 11:20:19 PM |
|
Lloyd, you're wrong.
Joe Wilcox is not a journalist. Yet another example of where lloyd and I don't agree. ;-) |
| #12 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/1/2008 7:58:21 AM |
|
#9: We were talking about the so-called 'Midori Experiment'. I don't know why you try to turn every thread into a Vista sales pitch.
#10: The United States brings the fight to the enemy, away from its own shores and onto ground of its choosing. Good plan. So why are you in Iraq? Actually, don't bother. I already know the GOP talking points on that so I don't need you to repeat them. #11: Yes, nobody's a journalist if you disagree with them. |
| #13 By 92283 (70.66.78.103) at 8/1/2008 8:24:48 AM |
|
#12 In the decades to come, many people will be proud of what the US Military and George Bush accomplished by overthrowing a ruthless mass murdering dictator and freeing Iraq from tyranny.
Others like latch, will miss Saddam. And be sad that Uday and Qusay weren't alive to take over the family mass murdering business/dictator business and pass that business onto their own sons. Many will be bitter that Iraq didn't turn out to be Vietnam. They hate US victories. It makes them physically ill to think about. Saddam they liked. He taunted the US. He was one of them. A hater. This post was edited by NotParkerToo on Friday, August 01, 2008 at 08:30. |
| #14 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 8/1/2008 8:56:29 AM |
|
Hey Latch... next time you turn on the lights in mom's basement... understand that all that yellow-cake that wasn't ever found... (oh wait... thousands of tons of it were...) in Iraq... were secretly spirited out of the country with the help of the Canadian government... to be used by Canada for nuclear fuel to produce electricity. That's one example...
And the delay going into Iraq (Sep 02 when we should have to mar 03 when we did)... what was that used for? other than to lick jelly out of the international community's backside... it was used to move components to Iran and Syria - nuclear weapons components to Iran and chem/bio to Syria (an Iranian puppet). and where was the press around the tonnage of yellow-cake moving to Canada - they claimed that "due to the very dangerous nature of the stuff and the risks of it falling into enemy hands, compelled them to remain quiet.." Right... "after" the fact? After it was moved last month?" There was so much of it that it took years to pack it safely - that's how toxic it was.. and not a word from the press - less one article by Slate of all publications.... Iraq is at the center of the middle east. The center of the problem. Take and hold the center. Deny the enemy resources and safe haven. You know... strategy... |
| #15 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 8/1/2008 9:08:12 AM |
| Pay attention, Latch.. the article was about the Mojave experiment and Vista... take your meds and get back on the subject. |
| #16 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/1/2008 10:43:25 AM |
|
#13, 14: Yep, keep on apologizing for Bush and Iraq. And ketchum, you need to loosen the strings that keep the tinfoil hat on your head with all your yellowcake nonsense and Iraq moving nuke materials to Iran & Syria. Where do you come up with this stuff?
#15: Yes, we were talking about the Mojave Deception when you started listing Vista internal subsystems like it meant something to the thread. Nobody in the Mojave Deception gives a rat's ass about the driver model for video, the driver model for audio, the networking stack or the Memory schedulers and management. |
| #17 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 8/1/2008 11:06:43 AM |
|
Latch = asshat + zipper head
The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program - a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium - reached a Canadian port yesterday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans. The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" - the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment - was a significant step toward closing the books on Hussein's nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi ... http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/20080706_Iraq_s_nuclear__yellowcake__moved_to_Canada.html 550 Metric Tons! Where is the national TV/Cable press on this issue? Eating popcorn and sucking on Dumb-Dumbs over at Latch's house... |
| #18 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 8/1/2008 11:07:24 AM |
| Oh... an Latch.... you're waaayyyy too young to call me by my last name alone... |
| #19 By 23275 (68.186.182.236) at 8/1/2008 11:17:16 AM |
|
Non existant” Yellowcake Uranium Moved From Iraq to Canada ]i]It’s official. There were WMD’s in Iraq. http://www.bloggernews.net/116579
AP Exclusive: US removes uranium from Iraq - http://www.newsweek.com/id/144703/output/print As I said, when you turn on your lights at night... think about where some of that juice may be coming from.... and Canada, again, "you're welcome" |
| #20 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/1/2008 12:01:45 PM |
| #19: If this is true... so what? Having some enriched uranium, not even suitable for a dirty bomb, justifies the destruction of Iraq? Not to most rational people. Maybe it's good enough for someone desperate to support Bush and his idiotic foreign policies. Face it; world opinion has judged Bush and his supporters as the worst administration in US history. His Iraq fiasco was a total failure, and him and his neo-con cronies are being slowly exposed for the frauds they really are. |
| #21 By 133380 (198.175.154.212) at 8/1/2008 1:59:25 PM |
|
Hey lketchum, did you even read the article you posted?
It says: "Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said." It wasn't news because it PROVED NOTHING. |
| #22 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/1/2008 2:02:01 PM |
| Oops. Oh well, we've now reached the point where ketchum will ignore this thread and move on to another. |
| #23 By 1896 (76.110.15.123) at 8/1/2008 2:19:53 PM |
|
#19: Iketchum let us not mix apples with oranges; "natural uranium" is not "enriched uranium" and you know it very well.
Besides, in spite of what improvised military experts and commentators keep saying, the Iraq campaign wil be studied for years as one of the worst planned and executed invasion of another Country. What surprise me is that the Secretary of Defense was supposed to know the area very well; it was Mr. Rumsfield that acted as the US Postmen delivering to Saddam Hussein data and satellite pictures during the Iran- Iraq war; maybe the guy had a short memory. The theory that the the WMD were relocated in other Countries is interesting... as it is the one that aliens built the piramids; both are theories. As for considering the invasion a success you should check what happened after another US brilliant operation: a guy called Mossadeq was freely elected Iran President, it took away from US Oil Companies the control of the extraction of crude oil; in name of freedom etc. etc. the CIA deposed him and put back the Reza Pahlavi as Shah. We are still dealing with the consequences of those actions. Unfortunately the US are not fighting where they wants; they are chasing people from Afghanistan to Iraq, now back in Afghanistan, tomorrow who knows where. There is a great book, an old one as it was published in 1832, called "Vom Kriege", On War" ,written by Claus Von Clausewitz; it is still studied today and it is very instructive to really understand how things are going. |
| #24 By 23275 (172.16.10.31) at 8/1/2008 2:58:39 PM |
|
#23, I not only read the book at the war college I taught there... they have the largest martial science library in the world - so one book doesn't come close to being enough.
@21, Sure I did and yes, there is a perspective there... the point was that even among those that disagree with the policy, they recognize the presence of the material and what it meant. @23, What?!? We are fighting exactly where we choose to. Read the Butler report in detail. Yes, the US supported Iraq against the Iranians - to prevent extremists from taking over the region and drawing the west into a larger war. The support was intentional, but balanced - enoough to keep the Iranians out, but not enough to enable, or empower Iraq to project power outside its own borders. Nasty? Yes? Not optimal? No, not by a long shot. The best, least costly (in terms of lives) option at the time? You bet it was. Look guys, (especilly 21) read the Butler report. It contains "all" of the facts. It clearly defines the timeline, the risks and the information that "is" supported by fact. 23 again, the government in Iran was stable 30 years. The people were prosperous. Religions were respected. Reza Pahlavi's government failed when extremists took the capital. By the way... you are so far off it is just awful... the Shah was the government, he ousted Mossadeq and replaced him nt with himself, but General Fazlollah Zahedi. You're not old enough to remember it and please.. I'm not trying to be mean at all, but before all the "Internet Stuff" I worked in and retired from our government. It was my job to understand these things, teach them and run various operations. Your facts are just a mess. Mossadeq was canned by his own government because he wanted to nationalize the oil industry, which would have crippled their new economy. His hired thugs staged riots and both and the Shah fled to Italy. The General put down the uprising and the Shah returned. This, and only this part is where both our CIA (which was not yet chartered by the way) and the British Secret Service supported the "existing" monarchy. The Shah returned after that - to his existing seat. You need to go back to 1795 to understand the origins of the Shah's ligitimate claim to the throne. Finally, why were we there? It was not for oil! In October 1955, Iran joined the Baghdad Pact, which brought together the "northern tier" countries of Iraq, Turkey, and Pakistan in an alliance - to offset Soviet aggression - who had aleady taken all of Iran's norther territories. I'm sorry fellas, but many don't know any more about teh above than they appear to know about Vista. I don't mean to offend, by golly... I'm an awfully old man that lived this stuff and what you are using as sources and what you are saying is just scary to me. |
| #25 By 92283 (70.66.78.103) at 8/1/2008 4:01:26 PM |
|
#20 Iraq isn't destroyed. Its on it way to be the most stable, democratic and prosperous country next to Israel in the Middle East.
What was destroyed was the Baathist mass murdering run version of Iraq. I know .. you miss the torture chambers and gassing of the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs and the genocide. The good old days of Saddam taunting democracies and making a mockery of the UN Oil for Palaces program. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 354 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:12:22 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
