Picked these up for my TRON Legacy theme build. Got the optional light bar upgrade kit(s). Note, for a quad channel package you will need two light bar kits as each covers two sticks. No issues...
I honestly love this cooler, but I think I'm gonna move on to another one soon, it just looks... A bit to bland compared to other flaming red (literally) coolers on the market.
Metro 2033 is one of the greatest FPS games ever made. Although not usually recognized as such, due to the horrible state the gaming industry is in, it succeeds largely on its storytelling,...
This is an update of the original Fractal Design Arc Midi. The solid left panel has been replaced by a panel with a plexiglass window and the top USB ports are now USB-3.0. Let me state at the...
I've used this headset extensively for MAG on PS3. The sounds were wonderful, the mic was crisp, and the ability to adjust peoples voice volume is absolutely invaluable. For $100 ( or less ) this...
Well, imagine if a virus looks for exact copies of a file on your hdd's and then decides to delete on of those copies and instead makes a reparse point, leading you to believe that you still have two copies of the same file (one for backup, in case the other one gets corrupted). If one day you decide to delete one of the copies, believing you still have the other, but you don't, you may find out about it too late.
In theory that would be possible. However it is not practical because it has no benefit to the virus creator. This also means the same "exploit" would be possible on every *nix system, too. On Windows, symbolic links require administrative rights to be created, too. So unless you run with full administrative rights, turn off UAC (I actually do this myself LOL), or click "Allow" on every single UAC prompt, this "exploit" is pretty much accounted for on Windows
Well, there are virus creators that do it just to create havoc; if I remember correctly, that is how viruses started in the first place.
I just think it would be better for Windows Explorer to inform the user there is a reparse point and what the real location is. This could easily be done without changing the address bar; for those cases Microsoft could display that information in a message in the same way Explorer displays when a location has not been indexed (when you're searching), for example. Preferably, they could display the real path in the address bar and inform the user in the message that they there is a reparse point for the address (and display the address) they entered. Edited by tpi2007 - 10/24/12 at 5:30pm
Also the windows row ... Good (XP) - Crap (Vista) - Good (W7) - Crap (W8)... Can't wait for W9
Win95: Good
Win98: Good
WinME: Bad
Win2k: Good (After SPs)
WInXP: Good (After SP1)
WinVista: Good (After SP1)
Win7: Good (Vista SP3)
Win8: Good internals, but Metro is like wat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IcedEarth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brutuz
Most of the problem isn't the same as those were, there was instability on release but with 8 it's more due to features, short of MS removing and fixing them in SP1...You get my point.
I fully appreciate that.
My point was in regards to the Vista hate, the blind patriotism to XP and the fact people apply the 'try one generation, skip the next one' logic.
I also appreciate that Metro will not be to everyone's tastes. It isn't to my tastes either, however after using W8 I have used the Metro GUI 2-3 times since I'm capable of operating everything from my desktop. If people actually tried Windows 8 they would realise that they don't need to use Metro as much as they think they do, most people are just spewing uneducated, regurgitated hate (luckily none in this thread yet) about how Metro sucks and how it's a deal breaker, without actually trying Windows 8 for themselves.
Oh yeah, for sure, people who hate on Vista clearly never used it properly after SP1 and clearly never used XP before SP1.
I use the start menu extensively, so unless I fork out more for Start8 or the like I'm screwed over; I'm going to move to Linux I think, as most of my games are compatible and as I'm sticking to either AMD or X78 Intel I'll have IOMMU for GPU passthrough on VMs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpi2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompsonn
That's right. Applications should be calling SHGetKnownFolderPath (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb762188%28v=vs.85%29.aspx) to get the location of these folders, BUT some hard code the paths in because programmers are lazy, and so Microsoft had to add the reparse points when going from XP to Vista so that programs that misbehaved would still function.
Actually Explorer *can* know that it is following a symbolic link. Its just that it doesn't care enough to find out. The user typed in the path to documents and settings, that's the path that should show up in the address bar. Doing it the opposite way would be worse because its inconsistent and would easily confuse users.
There's also no security flaw at all. Anyone asking for the location gets the same physical bytes from the disk - no matter how they ask for it. What exploits were you thinking of?
It also shows the "legacy" path that is symlinked for compatibility
Well, imagine if a virus looks for exact copies of a file on your hdd's and then decides to delete one of those copies and instead makes a reparse point, leading you to believe that you still have two copies of the same file (one for backup, in case the other one gets corrupted). If one day you decide to delete one of the copies, believing you still have the other, but you don't, you may find out about it too late.
The likeliness of that isn't high, and the benefits of symbolic links are many; for example, if you want some Steam games on an SSD you can use symbolic links to do that, or if (Like I was when I had no SSD) you want your users and program files folders on separate HDDs for speed reasons you can, I had it so C:\ was a small partition, my entire downloads folder was the rest of that drive (320GB, 300GB downloads folder), D:\ (500GB) was for Program Files and E:\ (500GB) was for Users, decent speed benefit as if a program needed to load data from the users data and from its own data at the same time (eg. Loading The Sims 3) then it got a significant speed boost because..well, it was on two HDDs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzleBoy
If farmiliarity is important for an office workers productivity, then I'm quite sure that the windows desktop will do them just fine, just like it did before.
I'm guessing that since they aren't going to be launching a billion different programs at a time, their start screens can be optimized to launch whatever programs they need regularly (like a big, easily distinguishable "THIS IS THE PROGRAM YOU LAUNCH ALL THE TIME" button), as well as limit other irrelevant things (just as admins could previously).
If that's too much for an office worker to handle, maybe you need to hire more staff under the age of 65.
Just my opinion.
Honestly, how is W8 going to seriously impact the average office workers productivity?
You do more than open one program in office work, I know an accountant for a large retail chain here in Australia and they have to run the companies own software, Excel, Outlook, etc all at once which the whole Metro App thing goes against and no matter what, you're going to have to let people retrain, etc for little benefit, if they wanted to lock down everything but the applications needed for work..they already could on WIndows NT 3.51, let alone 8.
Remember, we're not the normal person, I've seen people get confused by an iPod touch before that are under the age of 20 but old enough to drive and drink in Australia (ie. Over 18), only two of my friends really have any idea how to actually use a computer, the rest know how to type fast and use some keyboard shortcuts (ie. Copy Paste) but are hopeless when something is completely different, usually I get a text asking me to fix it. Hell, one of my friends didn't have internet at her share house for a while and when she got internet again, Firefox went from verison 3.6 to version 5 or 6 and was confused as all hell despite it being nearly the same with stuff moved around. Another one of my friends couldn't get video to play fluidly on his laptop until I made it use GPU acceleration. This is the typical user, they'll be confused by Win8 and work slower for a while than Win7, then at the same speed once they get a pattern down.
I get what you're saying, but in the grand scheme of things, what is the actual quantifiable difference these kinds of people will see in terms of productivity?
Harder to navigate the desktop? Nope, still the same.
Harder to use file explorer? Nope, still the same.
The only plausible thing would be application launching, but even that is easily fixed by simply pinning relevant programs to the task bar, meaning they'd literally never have to look at the metro screen for any reason at all.
So in the end, the actual difference between W8 and W7 in a productive environment can be argued to be absolutely nothing in many cases, especially for the type of persons you specified. Edited by GrizzleBoy - 10/24/12 at 5:45pm
The likeliness of that isn't high, and the benefits of symbolic links are many; for example, if you want some Steam games on an SSD you can use symbolic links to do that, or if (Like I was when I had no SSD) you want your users and program files folders on separate HDDs for speed reasons you can, I had it so C:\ was a small partition, my entire downloads folder was the rest of that drive (320GB, 300GB downloads folder), D:\ (500GB) was for Program Files and E:\ (500GB) was for Users, decent speed benefit as if a program needed to load data from the users data and from its own data at the same time (eg. Loading The Sims 3) then it got a significant speed boost because..well, it was on two HDDs.
Maybe I didn't explain myself 100%. I have nothing against reparse points. Like I said in my previous post, I just want Explorer to inform the user so he knows what is going on, that would be a step in the right direction in preventing any kind of malware from taking advantage of it.
I've always tried every beta and new release of Windows dating back to 95 (I still have the floppies around somewhere ). I never understood the hate Vista received, it was fine when it launched. People either forget or were never there when we transitioned from 98 to XP. Same hate for XP as it was for Vista - it used more power and ram. I think people just like to hop on a bandwagon of hatred without trying things.
On that note, I've tried Windows 8 and I hate Metro. It's a touch interface, and even with keyboard shortcuts and trying to keep an open mind, I still hate it. I'll be waiting this transition out, for the first time in 20 years.
Edit: Sorry, I abandoned ME pretty quickly. ME was probably the worst of the bunch. Edited by Code-Red - 10/24/12 at 6:01pm
I get what you're saying, but in the grand scheme of things, what is the actual quantifiable difference these kinds of people will see in terms of productivity?
Harder to navigate the desktop? Nope, still the same.
Harder to use file explorer? Nope, still the same.
The only plausible thing would be application launching, but even that is easily fixed by simply pinning relevant programs to the task bar, meaning they'd literally never have to look at the metro screen for any reason at all.
So in the end, the actual difference between W8 and W7 in a productive environment can be argued to be absolutely nothing in many cases, especially for the type of persons you specified.
Training. No matter who you are, you'll have set ways you use a system based off what you do and use now, it will always take time to work out which ones need changing and making new ones.
And yes, it is nothing when it comes down to it..But why would you bother going to it then? You're adding an extra cost (The cost of rolling out copies, lost productivity until people get used to it, etc) for absolutely no benefit which is my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpi2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brutuz
The likeliness of that isn't high, and the benefits of symbolic links are many; for example, if you want some Steam games on an SSD you can use symbolic links to do that, or if (Like I was when I had no SSD) you want your users and program files folders on separate HDDs for speed reasons you can, I had it so C:\ was a small partition, my entire downloads folder was the rest of that drive (320GB, 300GB downloads folder), D:\ (500GB) was for Program Files and E:\ (500GB) was for Users, decent speed benefit as if a program needed to load data from the users data and from its own data at the same time (eg. Loading The Sims 3) then it got a significant speed boost because..well, it was on two HDDs.
Maybe I didn't explain myself 100%. I have nothing against reparse points. Like I said in my previous post, I just want Explorer to inform the user so he knows what is going on, that would be a step in the right direction in preventing any kind of malware from taking advantage of it.
Ok I'm back and sane again since I haven't been awake for 28 hours. I apologize for my paranoid borderline psychotic rantings. The fact remains that it is the intent of Microsoft to transition to a unified OS across all platforms in favor of the consumer based mobile type. In the light of the issues I was poorly supporting earlier, the steps being taken by them in this regard undoubtedly moves more control over what can and can't be used in the system into the OS and away from the end user. To avoid more paranoid predictions and to err on the side of sensibility, I will now only say that I hope this situation is treated with moderation and fairness on the part of Windows' developers. And I will leave it at that.
edit: for another look at what happens when I am significantly insomniating, check out this proposal for a wireless temperature probe I made to a Bitfenix hardware representative. Edited by un-midas touch - 10/24/12 at 8:48pm
a unified OS across all platforms in favor of the consumer based mobile type
What drives me mad about their approach is that the RT version of Win 8 isn't even compatible with the x86 or x64 bit version, requiring all programmes to be rewritten/compiled.
Then there's the app store and MS emphatically stating they want to be like Apple and you can see where MS are going.
What drives me mad about their approach is that the RT version of Win 8 isn't even compatible with the x86 or x64 bit version, requiring all programmes to be rewritten/compiled.
Then there's the app store and MS emphatically stating they want to be like Apple and you can see where MS are going.
That would be because it is running on a non-x86 CPU.
Can't wait for W9
