Insights
I fear that insights might be an optimistic view of what's likely to be posted.
On the plus side, it does mean Orlowski's articles will have somewhere to post comments. (Apart from his welcoming email address, obv.)
329 publicly visible posts • joined 25 Jul 2007
I use Google Docs extensively (for appropriate purposes, not heavy lifting) and have never had significant trouble with latency. When I'm on a slow or flaky network it switches to slow/flaky network mode, which is dependent on Gears, and reverts to local saving as appropriate. It has always worked well for me. Just wanted to give you an alternate view.
Your comment appears to be a description of challenges faced when migrating from MS Office to another package with a user base and document archive mired in MS formats and functions. I agree that this can be a problem for the reasons you suggest, but it has nothing to do with the situation Ted brought up here, which is companies choosing to use Google Docs rather than "pony up for" MS Office. Google Docs can save all of its documents in ODT/ODS formats, and has a much more limited subset of functionality than OpenOffice or StarOffice, so there is no migration pain in a shift from Google Docs to Oo.o.
As for the issues with formatting changing in Word docs - this also happens between different versions of MS' own software, and yet people apparently cope with that sort of transition - why should they not cope with it in this case? Anyone who expects a word processor file to paginate identically on different machines even if they are running an identical word processor has never worked seriously with Word files.
"the San Francisco startup law of relying on free, online productivity suites instead of ponying up to Microsoft for something that actually works"
Yeah, cos that's the choice isn't it, really. Microsoft is the only organisation in the world which produces a usable office suite. OpenOffice.org doesn't exist, StarOffice doesn't exist, KOffice doesn't exist, Lotus Symphony doesn't exist (okay, fair dos), Ability Office doesn't exist, Gnome Office doesn't exist, iWork doesn't exist, NeoOffice doesn't exist.
The reality is that you don't need to pony up to anyone to get a desktop operating system and a full-featured office suite. Why not acknowledge that?
“In particular, if while using the Web Browser control, you allow the application to open new windows that do not respect the user’s default browser choice, you may see some issues”
This is exactly the problem you get now if you set your default browser to anything other than IE; at least with this new edition you will be able to ensure that IE doesn't just run anyway despite being "disabled".
a politician I loathe says something I completely agree with, but Fergus Ewing has it right here.
Gerhardt, lots of people have been saying that for a long time, but it never seems to go across. I think that is partially because this government, so adept at the art of spin and selling, is using the most devious and insidious of its persuasive tools on this project: time. They are literally boring the opposition into defeat. They are taking so long to take the steps along this road that all the arguments against are become stale, and get no coverage.
I don't like it, but I'm mighty impressed by it.
Does this question really always bother you? Because I'd have thought it would take no more than a moment for you to note that Apple does not have a monopoly position under which it habitually controls OEMs, ships a browser which is standards compliant instead of being based on an embrace-and-extend strategy aimed at controlling the web space, and has never been convicted of, and massively fined for, anti-competitive practices on a global scale.
Windows and OSX are not equivalent in any meaningful way as far as this issue is concerned, and suggestions that they should be treated as such in the interests of fairness are deeply dubious.
As others have pointed out, the point of IR35 was to ensure those who should be employed on a standard contract got employed on a standard contract. The measures used here to assess the success of IR35 completely ignore that outcome!
There is no proof of any failure of IR35 here; just a failure of Gerry Mclaughlin to see past the chip on his shoulder.
is why they do (and they absolutely will) invest so much money and effort in the marketing blitz for a new Windows version, when it's abundantly clear from the Vista experience that the vast majority of Windows sales are driven by OEMs including it in new PC purchases, while individual sales of retail Windows upgrades are insignificant.
There is a reason for continually updating Windows, and that is to support new hardware and usage requirements for desktop computers. But I can't see the argument for marketing it in the way they do. They are going to exploit their monopoly anyway. Why waste the money?
I'd never heard of this woman or her son, but thanks to her lawsuit I am now of the view that she probably is "a petulant, ill-willed, flame war-starting psycho bitch". So that's worked well I think.
It's remarkable to think that one's blog posts are potentially heritable; should wills include a section passing on passwords for online services?
And when I say "Sunday Times style", what I mean is false and misleading to the point of rabid duplicity.
Up to 40,000 URLs on the IWF block list accessed each day DOES NOT mean, or even come close to meaning, 40,000 child porn pages. As we know, from recent articles in this very publication, the IWF blocks a lot more than "child porn" - sometimes they block an entire site, or an entire page, when the only thing that should be listed is a single image. Assuming your average page, with images, CSS, JS and the rest, might deliver 10 files to a web browser, you can cut the figure down to 4,000 a day at a stroke. And that presumes that everything on the watchlist is child pron, which again we know isn't true. So let's halve it again - 2,000 attempts to access something blocked per day.
Seriously, there is enough sub-tabloid reporting on IT issues without EL Reg joining in. Get a fucking grip.
also quotes the head numpty at the Passport Service as saying that chip and pin is "one way to help protect internet shoppers".
Why are we allowing such stupid statements to be made unchallenged anyway? Isn't it the job of a journalist, in that situation, to say "excuse me, mate - how would chip and pin make any fucking difference to shopping over the internet, you lying twat?" Or words to that effect?
Argh, it drives me mad that government is STILL being run by management consultants and ad men.
I love this story. It is perfect in every way. Of course there is absolutely nothing wrong with a hand-shandy over a drop of hardcore, and huge numbers of people do it every day. But the VM bill makes it very clear which bits are for broadband and which bits are for TV, so whoever did the expense claim was either stupid or trying it on.
Anyway, the thing is, VM's porn channels are shit, and the only possible reason for paying for one would be that you are too lazy to point and click on the internet. That's what I find shameful here - this man has opted for low-quality porn out of laziness, rather than putting the effort in and finding something decent on the net.
Oh, and an IT angle - Jacqui is on VM then? Have they confirmed their stance on Phorm yet? Will she get a special opt-out if they do?
For fuck's sake, if this educated one non-technical viewer about the realities of botnets then it was worth doing. Security companies don't want that education because they make money out of people's ignorance! What the fuck is El Reg doing laying into the Beeb for this? It's really fucking unnecessary. Get your fingers out and get a story up here supporting the BBC who were doing a good thing here.
For the first time, I'm tempted to use the Death of El Reg icon in earnest. What the fuck is wrong with you? Sort it out.
"homosexuality isn't very clever, from a Darwinian perspective"
You're not very clever, from any perspective, if you think that statement made any sense. What the fuck is a "Darwinian perspective"? Do you mean simply to point out that a male/male coupling won't produce offspring? Bravo, Einstein.
"it's really quite rare for animals to be exclusively homosexual – usually it just seems to be a case of mistaken identity due to raging hormones"
Show your working, please. Or to put it another way, what a steaming pile of made up bollocks.
"Apple also took the opportunity today to remind world+dog that the newest browsers, including Google’s Chrome, are based on the firm’s own open source WebKit technology."
I hope they concurrently reminded world+dog that "the firm’s own open source WebKit technology" was based on a fork from KHTML and KJS from the KDE project which they kept proprietary for a year, after which they engaged on a completely unreasonable mass-patch basis with KDE before finally open sourcing the whole thing in a shower of PR bollocks which made it sound like they were doing the world a favour.
Something tells me they didn't though.
This really pisses me off, because actually his article does NOT say that social networking does any of this. What it says is not networking physically does all of this.
Someone who has an active social and family life and also uses social networks online is NOT affected by any of the ominous threats set out here.
Once again, a load of old bollocks is being spouted in order to sell scientific research as news, and while I expect the mainstream media to just regurgitate, I would have hoped El Reg would point out the obvious flaw.
Where's that bloody gravestone icon? Ah there's the little fucker.
Nobody comes out of this looking good.
If there is any truth in the sex pest allegations then the idiots who pursued a vendetta against the guy are almost certainly to blame for those charges not being laid, since as others have said they would have rendered most of the evidence inadmissible.
Clearly the guy himself is a twat.
And finally, this is dangerously one-sided reporting from El Reg.
You really do get an *awfully* good view from up on this high horse.
I genuinely don't understand what MS has done here. I thought the point of IE8 was it was shifting to standards-based renderings of HTML and CSS. I browse many of these sites on a daily basis (the BBC for example) using Ff, and see no problems.
Is it the case that all of these sites have workarounds that are triggered by the user agent being IE, or is it that IE8 isn't implementing web standards?
I don't get it.
It might just be that the HD capability is for outputting to an external display attached to that HDMI port...
Oh, and why would you want GPS inside a netbook? Surely you're better off with an external (BT) GPS receiver so you can put it in the best position for picking up the satellite. No point in balancing your computer on the dashboard.
I think Rowling's problem was that this wasn't fan-generated content. It was her content, copied not by a fan but by a profiteering publishing company.
The fact that she is happy that the amended book is being published speaks volumes. The previous version clearly just copied her work, which is indefensible.