From: Rick v100 (rickv100@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Apr 12 2005 - 03:31:46 PDT
Only Microsoft could create a self defeating security
system for a OS. XP ships with 2 user groups limited
and administrator. If you want any games that are not
"microsoft certified". ie pre-XP you have to run as
administrator.
Nothing I like better then making a 3 year old
administrator on a computer.
Hopefully 2000 will be better when they try to use it
on a CVN but I doubt it.
I can see it now. "Sorry Captain we can't launch right
now the IT department changed the network policy and
are asking for a complete explanation of why we need
access to the launch controls."
Rick
--- dgrev <dgrev@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> David
>
> > I hate to break the news to everyone but the
> biggest issue with Windows is
> > the Hardware, and other software. Think of it
> this way, Mac makes the OS,
> > and the Hardware and things work great. But the
> PC is well, anyone can
> > build it, from just about a billion different
> manufactures of hardware.
> > Garbage in Garbage out.
>
> That is a valid point. However, if MS didn't rig XP
> so that you had to
> have software specifically "certified" (that means
> pay MS money I think)
> then it won't be stable. There is a name for that
> sort of thing in law....
>
> > Now to add info to the whole Boeing and Airbus
> thing. When I worked at
> > Boeing, I always heard that a pilot on a Boeing
> plane had the last say over
> > the computer, it could complain but not override
> the pilots control. "Look
> > at the barrel role over Lake Washington 707 I
> believe" I also heard that
> > Airbus was exactly the opposite,
>
> Which was my point. The software was undoubtedly
> written by some nerd
> who wouldn't know an airplane if it bit him. They
> hadn't allowed for
> a go round (lets see, I think that was the 2nd thing
> they taught me
> in pilot training after "height is safety"). So, the
> excuse was
> "we didn't think of that", these people are building
> airliners and
> made no provision for a go round, nor did they
> discover it missing
> in all the simulator and flight testing???? Result,
> a very public
> display of how to use a brand new airliner as a
> gigantic tree mower,
> a big black cloud of smoke and a lot of dead people.
> The issue was something very basic, because the
> plane was dirty (flaps
> and undercart hanging out) the computer wouldn't
> accept pilot inputs
> from engine controls and primary flight controls for
> the go round.
> Basic flying is that in a go round you get the power
> on, get it
> climbing and then clean it up - the very scenario
> that they had
> left out of the programming.
>
> Perhaps it comes down to the fact that Boeing is a
> major military
> contractor and can think in terms of "unusual"
> flight situations
> whereas Airbus is primarily a people hauler?
>
> Personally, I have always prefered Boeing products
> and your comments
> only reinforce that.
> I regard it as very disappointing that Qantas
> has just ordered the new Mega Airbus' to replace all
> those 747s that
> have served so well. An insider told me that Boeing
> was just too darn
> hard to deal with, the attitude being "we make the
> best, you will
> do what we say". They have apparently lost sight of
> the fact that
> the customer is the one with the money. Which does
> explain why Boeing
> is loosing market share to Airbus. Qantas evidently
> tried very hard
> to stay with Boeing but in the end walked away
> frustrated. Now they
> will have all the incompatibility issues to get over
> that they
> wouldn't have if they had stayed with Boeing.
>
> Regards
> Doug
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
> <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
> <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:42:54 PDT