You should really consider losing the regular snide remarks about Microsoft in every article concerning them ("..about time..").
Although many readers will agree with your dislike of Microsoft, this kind of petty, cheap shot at the industry whipping boy just detracts from the professional, high-quality approach of the rest of the site. Whilst reasoned criticism is fine, cheap shots should be left to teenage boys.
Firstly, I agree wholeheartedly with Tim Rice - I really do miss reasoned criticism in the news section. Secondly, how would a 64-bit OS in itself provide for better data encryption? A 64-bit OS can compute the encryption operations faster so, for example, increasing key size would not cause as much of a performance penalty. However, the ability to use strong encyption is not really dictated by the OS being 32 or 64-bit (e.g. we are right now commonly using 2048 bit keys in a 32-bit OS).
This comment is hidden because you have chosen to ignore Geoff Richards.Show DetailsHide Details
I think Gordon's point is that Windows has been available in 64-bit form since 2005 (it will be 4 years next month) and there are millions of 64-bit capable PCs in use every day. So why wasn't Office 2007 made available in 64-bit?
Honestly, I'm not really sure it's necessary either way, but I don't think the "about time" comments constitute Microsoft bashing.
@Tim Rice - get over yourself, it IS about time and has nothing to do with Microsoft bashing. I personally use a PC, have never owned a Mac and have been waxing lyrical about Windows 7 for months now (I use it as my primary OS).
Drop the cheap shots and put in some research before making random snide remarks.
We're sorry. We were unable to report abuse at this time.
We limit the number of reactions an individual user can submit over a given period for quality reasons. You have currently reached that limit. Please try resubmitting your abuse report again later.
Comment is too long. Enter 500 characters or less.
Comments