Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


NoelC

What is it about Spartan that you find the tiniest bit interesting?

Recommended Posts

 

Win 7 pr 8 should move to 10 because of lack of security in IE11

 

 

no, IE11 is secure unless you turn UAC off and disable this way the sandbox around IE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether  UAC is on or off or even if IE is truly secure or not
has nothing to do with my point. Now I don't really know if
we'll be seeing notices on web sights stating something like
"ie11 no longer supported, move to Windows 10 for added security"
or something similar. But I can see it happening.
But as far as UAC is concerned I justr find it annoting.
You'll never convince me to run with it on.

 

Jim M

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Spartan run ActiveX at all?  I hope not.  That's the root of many (most?) security problems using IE.

 

Inviting malware in by putting up a big neon sign saying "Come On In!  Lodge Here Free!", then having UAC try to slap its hands as it reaches for the family jewels doesn't strike me as a prudent security tactic.

 

There is nothing I can see about Spartan/Edge that is attractive to users...  It's got fewer capabilities than IE - last I heard it wouldn't support web sites coded in older versions of HTML, and this business I discovered where it won't even allow something to run while the App is minimized - and it's uglier inasmuch as it doesn't conform to the desktop theme.  Microsoft seems to have become convinced they only have to SAY things are "new and improved" while not striving to actually do it.

 

Whatever happened to the "make it better and they will come" school of software development?  Is real work just too hard for the poor, dear young folks starting out in software today?

 

-Noel

Edited by NoelC
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be surprised if they cut off support for java and flash plugins but keep for their silverlight :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, any features of Microsoft Edge will only be able to be used by

universal apps. Which  will make it easier for Microsoft to end support for win32 and other legacy stuff.

Thus getting closer to having one store for windows apps.

And of course we'll all be more secure because of it!

 

Maybe in the future I might come across a universal app that I think is worth having.

But I don't feel good about only having one place to buy it.

 

Jim M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But as far as UAC is concerned I justr find it annoting.

You'll never convince me to run with it on.

 

 

Your point is, that you simply don't understand it. I wrote a guide about UAC here for dummies like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But as far as UAC is concerned I justr find it annoting.

You'll never convince me to run with it on.

Your point is, that you simply don't understand it. I wrote a guide about UAC here for dummies like you.

Wow that's super rude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Your point is, that you simply don't understand it. I wrote a guide about UAC here for dummies like you.

 

 

I find that comment condescending, Andre.

 

You have a strong opinion about UAC and tech skills but that doesn't automatically make you right and anyone who believes UAC to be an abomination a "dummy".  There are others who know what they're doing, who understand exactly what UAC brings to the party, and who understand it is a piss poor implementation of a bad idea.

 

The concept of unconditionally protecting the computer from the computer's owner is fundamentally flawed for those who know exactly what they're doing because it just gets in the way without adding any practical value.  And the other crowd - whom you want to label "dummies" - pretty much just clicks through the UAC prompts and gives permission for escalation anyway, making it both irritating AND ineffective at protecting them.

 

There are ongoing nuisances with UAC that no matter how permissive you configure it just come up again and again.  Things like "Can't create a shortcut here, do  you want to put it on the desktop instead?" after which you can just drag it to where you originally wanted it...  Data not really going into a system-wide C:\ProgramData subfolder because of file system virtualization...  Not being able to drag and drop between applications not started As Administrator and those that are...  Not giant problems, but **** nuisances that get in the way of real work.  Did I mention it's a POOR implementation?

 

I don't know about you, but when I walk up to a cliff to admire a scenic view, I don't require a fence / guard rail to prevent me from falling over.  I take on the responsibility to keep myself safe.  Funny thing...  I've looked at a helluva lot of scenery without guard rails in the past half century and yet somehow, amazingly, I'm still here.

 

When you drive the Autobahn, do you crave a car that stops you from exceeding 80 km/h, because no one could possibly go faster and be safe?  Or do you take the responsibility to drive right at whatever speed YOU choose?

 

Making UAC a requirement is one of the major reasons Win 8 flopped, and Win 10 will fail to win the hearts and minds of hundreds of millions of Win 7 users.

 

-Noel

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't know about you, but when I walk up to a cliff to admire a scenic view, I don't require a fence / guard rail to prevent me from falling over.  I take on the responsibility to keep myself safe.  Funny thing...  I've looked at a helluva lot of scenery without guard rails in the past half century and yet somehow, amazingly, I'm still here.

 

Well, of course in a perfect world you would not need fences or guard rails, the issue here is however more like road bumps.

 

Since everyone sped too much in an urban area, the municipality disseminated everywhere a lot of road bumps to force citizens to drive slower.

The net effect is usually that of having a much higher shock absorber and brakes replacement rate and a lot of people with back aches, whilst the average speed (and the number of incidents involving bikers and pedestrians) remain substantially stable.

 

A guardrail or fence prevents you from doing something (like jumping over the cliff) without a lot of effort or accidentally, i.e. it is a rather effective safety measure, highlighting a border you should not cross for your own safety, you don't normally need to cross it, while a road bump only makes your driving less comfortable and it is right in the middle of your daily path to work or home. 

 

As a side note (OT) musical roads are nicer and funnier:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_road

but people living nearby do complain, you can't have everyone happy :(.

 

 

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I can't stand about Microsoft Edge is that first it's a POS slow Modern app. Its rendering engine may be fast but that's about it. It starts slowly. It's based on the new bul***** principle about minimalism and Microsoft is making us beg by asking for "feedback" to add features that were ALREADY THERE in IE.

 

Also, many people are quick to assume that because the process for Edge shows less memory consumption than IE, Edge must be more efficient that IE. IE is native code. C++/COM. IE uses Direct2D and GDI. It's UI is very responsive. That Spartan UI is most probably XAML and is running on top of WinRT and EdgeHTML. That adds some performance overhead. Task Manager doesn't show the slowness of the WinRT runtime but in real-world tests, it's nowhere near as fast as native code nor memory efficient. Why couldn't IE have the EdgeHTML engine?

 

Edge did to IE what WinRT/Metro did to Win32. A dumbed down, touch-first subset for the stupid people of the world who can't see how powerful the classic apps and Win32 API were. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they do slow transition to .net/wpf apps

so they can get rid of win32 over time completely

 

but because cpu's are now multicore, nobody cares about unoptimized app's

and stupid .net will take dominance in near future, probably because it will be more portable

but its non native compile and stupid a** trash collector aka JIT makes it piece of shit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But as far as UAC is concerned I justr find it annoting.

You'll never convince me to run with it on.

 

 

Your point is, that you simply don't understand it. I wrote a guide about UAC here for dummies like you.

 

I'll always know you as the UAC fanatic. who had to insult me because I disagreed with them.

You think I'm a dummy, I can live with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't insulted you. I simply wrote the truth. You have NO knowledge and troll around. I haven't had 1 UAC prompt today, so UAC is no issue at all during normal work and instead of understanding it you bash about this feature.

 

I'll put you on my ignore list, so that I don't need to read your crap any longer *facepalm*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×