Start?

This is going to be short, but this particular thing drives me crazy. At some point some anti-Microsoft person noticed that to shut down your machine, you click the Start button. They apparently thought this was quite comical, and suddenly everyone on the internet is making fun of Microsoft for being so silly as to put the shutdown option in the Start menu. Now, it's possible the whole Internet is just stupid, or maybe people really do get it and then just keep making fun of Microsoft anyway because it makes them feel good, but just in case it's the former I'm going to clear it up right here. The "Start" on the Start button means start doing something. So, for example, if you want to start to shut down your computer, you would click Start -> Shut Down. You don't click the Start button to start up your computer either, but nobody seems to care about that one. No, it's not a perfect analogy, but when they added the start bar in Windows 95 it was a really big deal UI-wise (No more alt-tab switching!, wink), and it took a decade for somebody to finally complain that apparently they're too slow to figure out how to shutdown their machines.

Microsoft is a dirty thief, let's iCry about it

I found yet another video of Apple bitching that Microsoft steals all its stuff:

Normally when I talk about operating systems on here I focus on my love of Linux, so it may not be clear that my love for Linux is equal to my hate for Mac OS. I hate the look and feel, I hate the interface, I hate the software, I iHate their iNaming scheme, and I hate its users pretty much on sight. Mac users focus on three truths they latch onto like a religion (speaking of things I hate):

1. Mac is the best


2. Windows steals everything from Mac


3. Windows sucks

At some point they're going to realize that there's an issue in there somewhere. Windows steals everything so flawlessly from their precious Mac OS that they call it "photocopying", but Windows still sucks huge. Stop bitching that Windows steals all your shit as though they're going to stop or something; you can't maintain that you're amazing and yet still complain that people are imitating you and you want them to stop

It's just like a real table!

I've seen dozens of videos now on Microsoft Surface. First, I think Surface could be very cool, I love multitouch interfaces. Second, I think right now Surface looks useless. As far as I can tell, a personal Surface table can do exactly four things:

1. Show really big maps. This is pretty neat; personally, I would get tired of manually dragging a map around instead of just entering an address and going there, but I can see the use for it


2. Transfer files (well, really just pictures and music in the clips I've seen) between devices. This is useless for me, but cool for other people, so this one is good


3. Take the nice, organized photos stored on a device and explode them into a mass of disorganized thumbnails that you can spin and resize for no reason


4. Make little bubbles shoot out from a glass when you set one on the table

Now, the one that really annoys me is apparently Surface's big feature: allowing you to, and I quote from more than one video, "organize your photos". For some reason, Surface's definition of "organize your photos" is to take all the photos on your device, ignore any organization they may have like folders named "Vacation" and "Work", and spread thumbnails of them all over the table haphazardly. Sure enough, I check the Wikipedia article and there it is:

Apparently this is somehow a good thing. If I wanted my photos to be like this, I would take print photographs and spread them all over my much cheaper analog table. Why would you want this?

Terrible:


Sexy:


I made up those picture folders on the spot because I don't take pictures, but still. I really don't understand why you would want to use the method of organizing photos that computers replaced forever ago, that's exactly the wrong way to be going about this. We should be designing new interfaces that are even easier to use than the ones we have now, not ones that very accurately simulate stuff we've already gotten rid of. Somebody should write a Surface app that lets you play music by dragging an LP over to a record player and then dragging the needle onto the record. Not that people ever actually do anything with the photos but spin them around and resize them over and over again; it's actually very much like people who enable the desktop cube in compiz for the first time:

Microsoft: Standards are for lesser companies

The W3C has been working on a draft for supporting safe XSS requests. It's currently a working draft, so they're encouraging comments and criticism on the design; that's the whole idea behind publishing the working draft. Firefox 3 implements the draft as it currently exists. While I think implementing drafts is a somewhat bad idea, Firefox 3 is in beta, and Firefox's automatic update mechanism means they can make any changes that come up in the draft.

Did Microsoft implement the draft? Or, even better, did they just wait? Or, God forbid, did they take their ideas and contribute them to the W3C draft? Hell no they didn't, waiting and contributing to the community is for "the other guys". They implemented their own mechanism. How very precedented, Microsoft. They just couldn't fucking help themselves, they had to do it. So once the W3C draft is finalized, everyone else will implement it, IE will have its own way, and web developers will have to write functions that use both methods. Soon fun libraries will come out that handle all the browser differences for us so we don't need to bother. Libraries that needn't have ever existed at all. Pledge to conform to web standards indeed.

This question occurred to me once, and I still don't have the answer, so if somebody does comment or something. Why does Microsoft still make Internet Explorer? They don't make money from it, they were forced to start distributing it for free ages ago. They get in trouble for antitrust stuff because of it all the time. Every web developer alive hates them because of IE. They'll probably never get it right. What's the point? Why not just distribute Firefox or some other browser instead, and stop making a custom browser?

I counterfeited Vista. Apparently

It occurred to me today that I pretty much never update Vista, so I ran Windows Update. It found 40-some updates, so I told it to go crazy and install them all. I live on the edge like that. So then I restart, and get this:



A victim? Me? Damn the people I got Vista from! (I got Vista directly from Microsoft). I have no idea why it decided I stole Vista, but I click the resolve link, and it takes me directly to:



Er. OK then. I restarted, and everything was back to normal. So I have no idea why Microsoft decided I stole Vista, but at least they changed their minds pretty fast. I'm more confused why they decided to punish me by disabling, of all the features Vista has that I would need for day-to-day functionality, Aero. You stole Vista? No fancy graphics for you! Carry on with everything else though.

EDIT: I randomly discovered that this is apparently called "Reduced Functionality Mode", otherwise known as the "kill switch", and it will log you out after an hour, so apparently there were additional punishments in store had the resolution process not worked. Which is good, since more than one person told me the speed gain I got from having Aero off was probably the opposite of a punishment. It appears Microsoft has gotten rid of this in SP1, probably because it's unnecessary when users can't boot anymore