HP Slate is ‘meh’

[Conecti.ca’s] conclusion? “The official verdict is meh.” Yeah, ouch. Apparently the Slate’s biggest strength is also its greatest weakness — it’s essentially a touchscreen netbook, and that means that while it can run everything including Flash, it can be “slow and annoying.

Can this possibly be a surprise to anyone not in denial? These doofus Windows tablet devices are netbooks with the keyboard snapped off. Using a desktop OS not only too bloated to run well on their relatively slow processors, but unable to fully realize the experience of a touch UI.

The old ones sucked. The new ones suck. Future ones are gonna suck.

Bill Gates said you can’t just build a new OS for tablets, but he was wrong. It was wrong about tablets eight years ago, and it’s still wrong today. It’s actually sad to see a company like HP follow a path that a decade of devices has proved time and again is… wrong.

Another Pointless Monstrosity: The PC Industry Never Fails to Amaze


Let’s take a cheap laptop (aka “netbook”), flatten it, and use an “optimized” bloated desktop OS with a processor barely powerful enough to run it. Then let’s sell it for more than the iPad. We’ll claim it’s “better” because it has every port from the last decade, and hope people don’t notice the thickness, size, weight, and lack of battery life.

This “Ezy Tablet PC” is the embodiment of everything the PC industry gets wrong. not only in design, but in their thinking about what’s allegedly wrong with Apple’s hardware.

IDC Idiocy: Apple iPad is Not a Tablet PC

Although Apple’s iPad could find success, its shipments won’t count in IDC’s Tablet PC numbers since it doesn’t run a full operating system.

Remember when the iPhone hit the scene, and attempts were made to define “smartphone” so it wouldn’t be included? Well, now “tablet PC” is being defined as well.

This is nonsense. Aside from varying definitions on what a “full” operating system is, I’d argue that, as a touch device, a “real” tablet PC must have an OS designed for touch from Day 1. Therefore, “optimized” Windows machines need not apply.

Whatever. The only way for PC makers to avoid being embarrassed by Apple’s runaway success is to try defining Apple out of the picture.

I’m usually wary of articles claiming to be “the straight scoop”…

The PC-or-Mac debate has been raging for more than a quarter-century, but making sense of it requires considering the situation as it stands at one moment in time.

Harry McCracken on PC vs. Mac. Though broad in scope, it’s one of the few articles I’ve read claiming no bias that manages to more or less pull it off.

IT PRO: 80 Percent Of Viruses Love Windows 7.

According to one leading security research lab, Windows 7 is vulnerable to an astonishing 8 out of 10 viruses it was exposed to during testing.

(via itpro.co.uk)

The author questions the test because no anti-virus software was installed, and new viruses were used to test the exposure. He seemed to think this might not be fair, but I strongly disagree.

This was the perfect way to test Microsoft’s claims that Windows 7 was ├╝ber secure, hard to crack, etc. They’ve been bragging about security for Vista and Windows 7 for years, yet no one has done the obvious: test them on their own.

It should be obvious that anti-virus software masks the underlying operating system’s vulnerabilities. Such a test only shows how good the AV software — not the OS — is at protecting a PC.

What Sophos’ test proves is that MS was full of it regarding the security of Windows 7; that in point of fact an anti-virus solution is absolutely required to secure your system, because the OS itself is as vulnerable as ever.

Run the same test with a BSD, Linux, Mac, or other *nix system and they’ll kick Windows 7’s ass, and with no third-party solution as a band-aid. That’s because they’re already secure, thank you.

Posted via web from The Small Wave.

Though Windows 7 Taskbar Is No Mac OS Dock, You Can Put Folders On It.

Win7 Desktop2While the taskbar in Windows 7 is huge improvement over the old one, it’s incredibly weak compared to Apple’s dock. The biggest disappointment to me is that you can’t put folders there, or at least you can’t drag them there.

As it turns out, there’s a process you can use to get a folder on the taskbar, and I did so for some of my common ones. Once you do it a couple times, it’s a pretty simple process, though it’s silly to have to go through such hoops.

Unfortunately, all you can do once the folder is there is click on it to open the folder. That’s it. You cannot see what’s inside via stacks or hierarchical views like on a Mac. You cannot navigate the directory like on a Mac. You cannot spring-load the folder like on a Mac. You cannot launch or view anything from the folder like on a Mac. Bottom line is having a folder on the taskbar saves me one click, and that’s all.

Still, for common folders I’ll take what I can get. Especially since, for all the bragging on Microsoft’s part, Windows 7 still requires too many clicks.

Finally, here’s a quick tip: For a custom look change the shortcut’s icon before you pin it to the taskbar. The file imageres.dll in the System32 directory contains a number of nice icons from which to choose.

VMWare Fusion 3.0 Is Here: Upgrade So Far Is Painless.

Noticed it available, upgraded from 2.0 and downloaded it online ($40). Took about 15 minutes to download.

Installed in less than 10 minutes.

Hey, the screen doesn’t do screwy things when I boot up Windows 7 any more.

Noticed that the VMWare Tools did not update on their own, so I updated them (took a couple minutes and a reboot).

Picked an Aero theme in Windows 7 and, voila!, I now have Aero on a virtual machine.

Nothing else to report but I’ve been running it just a short time. It was a very quick upgrade for such a major release. I thought it might need to mess with my VM files (I run XP Pro and Windows 7 RC), but no.

So far, an impressive and completely painless upgrade process.

Posted via email from The Small Wave.

Ars Technica Windows 7 Review

So while Windows 7 may not right all of Vista’s wrongs, it is absolutely superior to its predecessor. It has three years of improvements, so it can’t help but be better. But if you hated Vista’s UI, you’re going to hate Windows 7’s. Worse, in fact, because 7 forces you to use the new Start menu and taskbar, with no possibility of reverting to the old behaviour. If your applications didn’t work in Vista, they almost certainly won’t work in 7. Sure, 7 has some virtualization tools to help, but this was always possible in Vista too. If you felt Vista was too big and too slow, well, 7 isn’t going to provide much joy there, either. Marginal improvements, perhaps, but nothing more.

The above quote, from the closing summary, sure doesn’t sound impressive. Still, the entire review (it’s long and detailed) is positive overall.

The reviewer thinks Vista got a bad rap. Even though he agrees Windows 7 is actually “Vista R2”, he likes it a lot.

Posted via web from The Small Wave.