|
|
Post by Col7777 on Feb 12, 2009 4:06:10 GMT -5
I read recently that what might be happening with Microsoft programs, this has been in the pipeline for a while as some of you may already know.
I read they are thinking of 'SaaS' (Software as a Service) there may be other names for it too, what it means is, you have a PC with an operating system and that about it, the software you rent off Microsoft over the Internet.
It may have some merits but not many, they choose what upgrades the software has not you.
They may go that way with some sims, so if they did FS again and you made a model, you send it to them and they decide IF it is worthy or not, and more than likely charge you for it.
So no more downloading afcads, models, scenery etc, I'm afraid that is not the path I want to take.
You can all think of lots of possible problems if this came about, trying to contact them because of a glitch, the funny thing is, it just could be the way things will move in the future so other software companies will follow suite, or could it be Microsoft's downfall and other companies will offer their programs as Non-SaaS?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2009 6:43:28 GMT -5
Hi Col7777.
I don't know what to think about they have in their pipeline. We can expect some weird things to come...for sure.
Anyhow, the news, I read last month, about Microsoft's closing of ACES studios (the division which developed games including Flight Simulation software for Microsoft), will maybe lead into the Non-SaaS direction??
greets from EB
|
|
|
|
Post by Col7777 on Feb 12, 2009 9:48:25 GMT -5
Hi EB,
One thing crossed my mind about this, I can imagine someone buying a piece of software and during the install a window pops up saying something like,
'The software you are trying to install is a non approved Microsoft product, click OK to stop the installation'
There will only be one button to click on, I can then see people looking at other operating systems.
|
|
|
|
Post by capflyer on Feb 12, 2009 10:03:15 GMT -5
Phil Taylor had an interesting Blog a few days ago saying that 2 groups had been formed within Microsoft that looked like the TrainSim and FlightSim technology was going to move forward, but no clear indication from M$ as to what the final product would be. One group is in Microsoft Game Studios (where they've been consolidating almost all of their game production for all platforms) and the other is in the Microsoft Research area. The MGS guys are developing a "flying game" but no further information has been released. The MS Research guys will be apparently taking the stuff from TrainSim II and developing it, hopefully into a game at some time in the future. We'll have to see what happens. BTW, PT's blog entry is here - www.futuregpu.org/2009/02/end-of-era-part-iii-more-updates.html |
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Feb 12, 2009 10:36:46 GMT -5
Thanks for the link to Phil's blog. I had heard about the Art Lead position over at simflight. I now guess that ACES was canned because they resisted going in the direction that MS brass wanted the franchise to go (more gamer type play, etc.). Phil does mention in his previous blogs that the MGS head changed recently, and I assume he wanted changes in the sim that ACES resisted (perhaps he wanted a simpler game that could be delivered more quickly - Phil states that time and manpower were an issue). The group taking the TS stuff appears to be some kind of social networking game - not train related? All Phil's blogs on the subject: www.futuregpu.org/search/label/Aces |
|
|
|
Post by ashaman on Feb 12, 2009 13:30:14 GMT -5
Hi EB, One thing crossed my mind about this, I can imagine someone buying a piece of software and during the install a window pops up saying something like, 'The software you are trying to install is a non approved Microsoft product, click OK to stop the installation' There will only be one button to click on, I can then see people looking at other operating systems. Something like this, the remote control and online approval ( or eventually not) of what you use, was already thought to be scheduled to be used on Vista, when the OS was still far from being even in beta, when the OS got out, this aberration of the concept of Palladium was discovered to be false. As I see it, it would be like buying a computer but not being able to use lit like you want. An abuse under other name. It would surely be the ultimate victory of Mac and Linux and the funeral of Microsoft. I really can't see that happening.  |
|
|
|
Post by Col7777 on Feb 12, 2009 14:46:20 GMT -5
Hi asherman,
I know I was just imagining what could happen and I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to do it or try it, I did hear that sort of thing was planned for Vista as you mentioned, but it shows how they are thinking.
If my memory serves me right didn't Tandy have a PC where the OS was locked away and you couldn't touch it but you could run games from the OS, I think the problem with that was it couldn't be updated so it became limited as to what it could do.
As you say IF it did happen it would be the end of Microsoft, this reminds me of when video recorders hit the market, there were three types of media, Video2000 where you could turn the tape over once it got full, then Betamax, I hear the quality of the picture was very good, though I never ever seen anything from it, then VHS, which as we know dominated the market, just like Microsoft with their OS.
But now video is phasing out and not many use it, I got rid of mine a few months ago as it never got used, so who knows may be another type of PC OS might emerge?
|
|
|
|
Post by ashaman on Feb 13, 2009 8:24:59 GMT -5
It's Ashaman.  I know I was just imagining what could happen and I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to do it or try it, I did hear that sort of thing was planned for Vista as you mentioned, but it shows how they are thinking. Let them think and dream their dreams of world conquest. The users all showed their GREAT appreciation for the mess that is called Vista as it is, figure if it was a Palladium Full Compliant OS.  Users are not monkeys, especially those who buy a OS as an upgrade for a PC that already has one. If the upgrade is instead a DOWNgrade... well, the abyssal success of Vista should be a warning enough. For the archive, I've worked in the computer tech for a while, and have still friends there who told me stories well beyond the grotesque about the number of hopeful people who bought a new PC with Vista, only to return, hope lost, asking them to roll back to WinXp. Here in Italy at least 8 over 10 PC's born with Vista end up with Xp in the first 2 months of life. ...and the other 2 PC over 10 are usually notebooks for which there aren't ( yet) WinXp drivers. If my memory serves me right didn't Tandy have a PC where the OS was locked away and you couldn't touch it but you could run games from the OS, I think the problem with that was it couldn't be updated so it became limited as to what it could do. Well, all the first "PC"s, among quotes, were such. Hereabout the Commodore 64, elsewhere the Sinclair Spectrum, even the "PC 8 bit" MSX were like that. They had the OS on ROM. We're talking of the latest technology... of the last milennium. ;D Of course, seen today's Bloatware, a ROM edition of a OS is a totally absurd concept, yet, in the end, would it be any different if once installed? Wouldn't it be like using a ROM based OS all the same? As you say IF it did happen it would be the end of Microsoft, this reminds me of when video recorders hit the market, there were three types of media, Video2000 where you could turn the tape over once it got full, then Betamax, I hear the quality of the picture was very good, though I never ever seen anything from it, then VHS, which as we know dominated the market, just like Microsoft with their OS. But now video is phasing out and not many use it, I got rid of mine a few months ago as it never got used, so who knows may be another type of PC OS might emerge? You forget that for a user nowadays alternatives do exist. In the freeware with Linux Ubuntu, easy to install and configure... In the normal channels with the Mac... ...and one of the things I've never understood is why, just WHY did the people at the Mac, leaving the Motorola 68000 legacy for the Intel's, did and are insisting in making an OS that works only on their brand hardware. How many would have remained with Microsoft, I can't help but speculate, with the Vista debacle as above going on, had been the Mac-OS a freely installable OS, instead of a private road to walk only if you're ready to fork from 2 to 5 times more money ( in these years of recession nonetheless) for the very same hardware you can find way cheaper for the PC compatibles? How many of those people, feeling jilted by Microsoft, would have instead migrated under the Apple, seen the vastly better OS this has ( even if compared with the stable WinXp, honestly), had this been installable on every PC compatible, making the Mac world stronger? Lack of foresight can cost dearly. If bad comes to worse, and your fears become reality, I myself am more than ready to throw Microsoft to the sharks and migrate under Ubuntu ( OS that becomes even more appealing to me as time goes by), and I have the distinct feeling I'd be far from alone. ...should things go down that hill... I can already hear the funeral dirge for Microsoft. |
|
|
|
Post by capflyer on Feb 13, 2009 12:07:29 GMT -5
Sorry, but OS-X or even Safari isn't better than Windows XP or even Vista. Why? Because Apple can't seem to get their rear ends together to patch the things. OS-X STILL has a massive security hole in it that Apple refuses to acknowledge or patch. I have several friends that are die-hard "Mac Fiends" and they have taken OS-X and Safari off their systems and put Ubuntu or UNIX prime with a Windows shell on them because of these issues. The only reason that OS-X and Safari seem better, especially in the security area is because Apple doesn't have as many units out there and thus the perceived number of attacks on their OS is much less. Because of this, many think that Apple makes a better OS when in fact it's simply that because Windows IS so popular that the quantity of attacks is higher.
Think of it this way - if you were a hacker trying to make a name, would you attack the Macs that make up less than 40% of the total home computer population of the world or the Windows-based PC's that make up 60%+ and are used by many government and government agencies around the world? Because of their occupation of the vast majority of the market, Microsoft has to continually update and close holes that hackers find. But that's where they succeed - they quickly identify holes that hackers find (which that's what they do - find holes) and close them to minimize the impact that an attack can have. Between Microsoft's commitment to closing security holes and a decent virus protection suite, 90% of users will never have a problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Col7777 on Feb 13, 2009 13:23:04 GMT -5
Sorry Ashaman about the name, I got it right this time.  This is getting interesting, I have a cousin with a MAC, it does seem to have good graphics from what I've seen plus the external look , but as for the rest of it I can't comment. I thought perhaps MAC's were popular in the USA, the only reason is, whenever I see a movie they always seem to have a MAC, is that again for show? I was talking to someone yesterday about this subject and he was saying he too might start looking at Linux, it got me thinking about it. So if I had Linux as my OS, I take it that it can run programs like FS and such? |
|
|
|
Post by ashaman on Feb 13, 2009 14:44:08 GMT -5
Sorry, but OS-X or even Safari isn't better than Windows XP or even Vista. Why? Because Apple can't seem to get their rear ends together to patch the things. OS-X STILL has a massive security hole in it that Apple refuses to acknowledge or patch. I have several friends that are die-hard "Mac Fiends" and they have taken OS-X and Safari off their systems and put Ubuntu or UNIX prime with a Windows shell on them because of these issues. The only reason that OS-X and Safari seem better, especially in the security area is because Apple doesn't have as many units out there and thus the perceived number of attacks on their OS is much less. Because of this, many think that Apple makes a better OS when in fact it's simply that because Windows IS so popular that the quantity of attacks is higher. Well, I was speculating the people of the Apple would want to make themselves a little empire, like Microsoft has. Of course if there's a lack of desire to WORK for it... ...and yes, Microsoft has worked for what it has. Not always ( :  honestly, not always (  ) correctly, but did work for it. As for the rest... there is not an OS without security problems. Even Linux. Only that, as you said, if a hacker is less motivated to attack MAC users, how dedicated can this hacker be to attack an even littler number of users that the Apple's. Well, that and Linux IS updated regularly. Seems odd to me that Apple may refuse to patch a hole in their OS.  Sorry Ashaman about the name, I got it right this time. No sweat. This is getting interesting, I have a cousin with a MAC, it does seem to have good graphics from what I've seen plus the external look , but as for the rest of it I can't comment. I thought perhaps MAC's were popular in the USA, the only reason is, whenever I see a movie they always seem to have a MAC, is that again for show? I have some friends over the net, pilots like me of a Virtual Aviation ( historical section), with whom I fly online often and as often talk over SKYPE who are convinced Apple buyers, but having never been at their homes ( they live at something like 400Km from here, not really a morning stroll) I myself can't really tell a lot about these " great" systems. What I CAN and DID tell them was that I would have never forked all those € for a hardware that TO ME did cost 1/3 of that price, only to have the dubious honor of being able to install a fully working OS-X. I was talking to someone yesterday about this subject and he was saying he too might start looking at Linux, it got me thinking about it. So if I had Linux as my OS, I take it that it can run programs like FS and such? There are emulations systems that allow to run Windows programs under Linux ( Wine, to name one), but I am at this moment unable to say if it would be able to make FS usable ( sincerely, I'm rather dubious it can). As it is, anyway, and seen that Microsoft stopped being interested in FS, should I ever decide to migrate under Linux ( be it Ubuntu or any other distribution), I think I would migrate stably under X-plane as well. Stably because I already have and from time to time use X-plane 8.64. It would become my sole simulator, I guess, it or the V9, should I ever decide to leave Windows together with Workbench ( Amiga), behind in my past. PS Made a fast research, pushed by curiosity, about the usability of Flight Simulator under Linux and Wine...  The result found online were disheartening. Only FS95 seems to work all the others are unusable.  |
|
honestly, not always ( 
) correctly, but did work for it.
