Slashdot Mirror

While it's true that NetWare can interact with some DOS functionality, they're independent. There's a command "REMOVE DOS" that removes DOS from memory. If you run this command, you will not be able to return to DOS. Here's a link with a deeper explanation. Also, there were version that booted from OS/2 and IIRC Unix.

"It's reasonable to assume that this guy didn't know what he was talking about. Don't assume he's a liar just because he's connected to Microsoft."

What's wrong with this picture?

He's a Microsoft shill. He doesn't know what he's talking about, but he made direct and unambiguous comments about it. That makes him a liar in my book.

As for violating the EULA terms, nobody gives a rat's ass whether Bart's PE is "reverse-engineering" (it probably is, at least as far as the build process goes - is that necessarily covered by the EULA? Take it to court and find out). Secondly, even if you are enabling Windows XP to run on a second machine, you are only running a small PORTION of XP, not the whole thing. You are therefore not using it to violate the purpose of the license, which is to prevent people from using XP on more than one machine.

And that latter is itself onerous, since it was my understanding that you could install a single copy of Windows on both a desktop and a laptop that you personally own (not that most people would need to, since they would get both machines with it already installed.)

Read this from http://www.networkworld.com/net.worker/columnists/ 2004/0920gaskin.html:

In Section 1.5 of the Windows XP EULA it states: 1.5 Storage/Network Use. You may also store OR INSTALL [My emphasis] a copy of the software on a storage device, such as a network server, used only to install OR RUN [My emphasis] the software on your other workstation computer. The logic here for the customer is that "I'm only storing a copy of the operating system on the back-up device, and only for the purpose of reinstalling the operating system in case of failure."

Pray tell, what is the difference between that and running Bart's PE?

And especially for tech support people like me, who would otherwise have to carry around a separate copy of Windows XP - which would be useless because it could not be installed on the client machine anyway without destroying the existing installation.

This column specifically states - and from official Microsoft sources, apparently - that it is a violation of the EULA to make an image backup of Windows XP!

If that is the case, yet another reason to tell Gates to stick Windows up his ass.

The fact that you're completely and totally wrong is part of why there is a decline in people even bothering to study computer science any more, except in India and China.

Now please, spare me your fake cowboy act. The only thing you are fighting for is your spot on your knees in front of your corporate masters who are pitting six billion people against each other for what is proven to be a shrinking number of jobs in the computer industry. (http://www.networkworld.com/careers/2004/0531mans ide.html)

Me? I'm in school for something else now. I'm abandoning the tech industry when I graduate. You're free to continue your "fight" for the suite room on the Titanic.

In 20 years there won't be anyone working for IT in your country or mine. Except for corporate Execs, of course. Or do you have another explanation for why there are now fewer people working in IT?

They're called packet switches and Verizon is migrating their TDM network to them. http://www.networkworld.com/edge/news/2002/0710ver izon.html

It is the only client which encrypts all comunications end-to-end

And you've had a close look at how this "more secure" "end-to-end" encryption works. Last I checked, nobody had bothered to formally release any elements of the Skype protocol (although this may have changed very recently) for public scrutiny. I won't bother pasting more than one link about how much we should trust proprietary / secret / super duper clever new encryption mechanisms that aren't openly available for analysis. Skype has already had a few fairly nasty publicized holes.

It's interesting, y'know. ROT13 is also a form of encryption.

Skype may be convenient to use (although I've had some utter misery with transmission quality for about 50% of my connections) but it re-invents the wheel in a lot of ways, not all of them good. I'm not, by any means, claiming that Google is any better (although TLS is a pretty mature, proven technology) but security certainly isn't the quality I would recommend it on over something newer, better and shinier.

Although to be fair, from the little that I've seen, Google's means for dealing with proxies and firewalls seem pretty limited.

Having said that, it looks like the ZyWALL's stack up pretty good against Sonicwall's low/mid end.

Per ZyXEL's home page, their ZyWALL 70 won Network Computing's "Best Value Award" and SC Magazine's "Best of 2004" award. Not too shabby. Also did a quick google search and turned up this review from Network World, "the Zyxel ZyWall 70 comes in a close second to SonicWall."

When is Cisco, D-Link, Netgear, going to learn to turn on encryption by default?

It still astounds me that computers seem to halve people's intelligence. What is WEP going to get you?

Yes, I just karma whored a google search for "WEP encryption break".

Also, I don't use WEP at home, nor do I use any kind of encryption by default at work for our ethernet. In fact, I've only heard of things that are by default encrypted like interbank communication, and I would assume the military might use some encryption between some links, but its not universal.

So please, WAP manufactures, start doing what none of us already do on a daily basis. It will improve security.

Ahem.

Basically their proprietary IOS operating system is making way for Linux (a distro which they purchased if memory serves me correctly). I think this may be a case of "don't let the facts get in the way of a good old fashioned long-haired troll".

And yes, those new routers are *very* expensive!

This (virtual)article looks like a followup interview on a RedHat event mid june, where Fink talked about the possibility to run linux natively(as opposed to virtual). It got some coverage then, eg ,

http://www.networkworld.com/newsletters/linux/2005 /0613linux2.html">here.

Yahoo news has the new interview. It's mentioned in one of the first posts here.

Do you have any links to actually back up statements such as "They actually had the news release on their website a few years ago"?

I've been looking, and I'll I've found via google so far is news articles talking about a report by Amnesty International that cited Websense as a vendor who sold filtering software to the Chinese government. Many of the articles have quotes from Websense saying specifically that China is NOT a Websense customer, and that they were investigating the (reported false) accusations.

I have not been able to find any information on the Websense site in their news releases about them landing China as a customer. If you have any further evidence to back up your claims I would love to see it, though.

See, among others:
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,107520,0 0.asp
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2002/1202china.ht ml

PoE (802.3af) is incredibly useful in for business deployments of video cameras and wifi access points, not to mention mini-switches and outdoor wireless bridge equipment. You can even power a laser link with PoE. It makes life easier for those averse to paying out huge amounts of cash to have an electrician come in and put in new outlets. I've been playing with PoE splitters recently to power non PoE gear at 5 & 12V DC - the splitters are $35 ea and are switchable between voltages.

Probably a Cisco box rather

"Come on now, be civil. The Internet belongs to the world."

One BIG reason why US refuses is because the UN doesn't have a working LEGAL system.
I.E. Courts to resolve disputes and contract issues, courts to review lower court decisions, etc.

The UN would be hard time pressed to come up with a replacement legal system.
Heck the UN can't even police their own personal. I.E. Witness the Oil for food debacle.

I suspect that the US Dept of Commerce also took notice on how easy it was for ICANN to get rid of the, "at large members", of the Board. That didn't go over too well and is another reason why ICANN wasn't given addditional control.

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2004/0830neworion .html

lots more found from a search

Howdy

The July 4th, 2005 issue had an article similar to this one:

Are firewalls expendable?

Quote from the article:

"But a growing number of security managers, united under the banner of the Jericho Forum, want to retire this stalwart because they say it hinders e-commerce."

cheers

front

Disclaimer: I am an AT&T security employee

Recently the talk has started about Aurora http://www.networkworld.com/news/2005/053005-auror a.html
which was available internally for some time and more recently became an offering (in test).

My own pet security project (OSS-based) within AT&T has recently been obtaining far more support too. I've also been in talks with some bigwigs about expanding some of our other security capabilities.

Everyone I have been in discussions with has stated one thing clearly - AT&T is going to be moving seriously into security.

IMO heres why: #1. Your solutions are no longer usable/feasible/needed. Everything you are offering everyone else has and has for a LONG TIME. #2. People arent leaving you b/c you never had these services, they are leaving b/c your service sucks balls, you bill 23.95 for dial up when someone can AT LEAST pay that much for DSL -lite and in turn can get online whenever they want which in turn doesnt make them keep dialing up and dialing up and keeping getting busy signals. #3. Quit LIEING with your ads about AOL for broadband. You dont offer broadband you dimwads, you offer an overbloated piece of crap on top of your already overbloated aol software so someone out there with no sense can pay $10 more to use with a service they are already paying $30 - $40 for, especially for people that have cable. #4 -- even your most loyal user base, including even grandma's are leaving you because they are either doing the research and wisening up themselves or they have geeky grandchildren to tell them how dirty you really are. either way you lose. #5 -- 2003 25.3 Million customers, 2004, 24.0 million, 2005 21.7 million and still counting. i think thats enough said. sure you may add some people to their 'new feature(s), but you will lose many many more. i guess the only bad thing in the end will be if AOL does go belly up will be ALL the people that use AIM..but i guess we could all go to gaim or trillian.

John Glenn said it. But apparently he was paraphrasing Alan Shephard.

VoIP, meanwhile, lets JetBlue run an effective call center even though all agents work from their homes.

Agents access the airlines reservation-system application and phone system via two dial-up lines to their homes. The dial-up line for the application connects workers to the LAN inside the Salt Lake City data center. PC client software is used to access the system.

To get onto the call center's phone network, agents dial into an Avaya Definity G3 PBX phone switch, running call routing software for queuing and transferring calls to the right agent. The PBX establishes a direct link to the JetBlue agent, who hooks in via software rather than a traditional call-center desk phone set. The software is an Avaya softphone client that runs on Windows PCs and connects to the main office through a modem connection. The agents use a USB headset to talk with customers.

The softphone client also is integrated with the back-end systems, letting agents access customer records or other information quickly through screen-pops.

No, not at lunchtime...AMD is getting pounded into the ground by Intel like a tent stake in July. AMD might be turning out some pretty good products but no one is buying the high-end AMD stuff and the Intel-Apple deal is another example of a computer maker turning their back on AMD's excellent products. Dell, Gateway, Sony, and IBM/Lenovo are already 'Intel only' oems. HP still sells AMD but only for a few models. The result is that AMD is not not making any money selling cpu chips and it is only a matter of time before they have to fold their tent and leave the field to Intel. Sure, the AMD flash memory business was a loser for them recently but, according to the article, the cpu sales were only $750 million for Q1 2005. AMD's market share for Q1 2005 was 16.9 percent of a worldwide market of approximately 120 million units. That means that AMD's average selling price was only about $37. Obviously, AMD is selling mostly the ultra-cheap low-powered 32-bit Semprons and only a relative tiny handful of the high-powered 64-bit $200+ units. AMD has some excellent high-end chips are but no one ever seems to actually buy them in the kind of volume that might allow an innovative company like AMD to survive in business.

I guess nobody read the next article? "Shattered Mac illusions"...

Now, let's review: This was a brand-new machine, the system detected no problems and iPhoto hadn't been used before, but handling just less than 15,000 images made it blow up. And I thought Mac applications were generally considered to be better than Windows applications. Evidently this is not the case.

Their hardware / gadget guy also goes to the Mac side, but he doesn't have as pleasant an experience:

http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2005/052305 backspin.html

If it is, then this guy is a shoe-in.

I have some linked from my site:

ILM technology

You might want to check this one from 2003 which talks a bit about what they were planning for their new network at the Presidio:

10g Muscle

The performance of the AMD X2's is absolutely amazing but...will anyone really buy them? The big computer companies seem to be offering mostly P4's at about 3 Ghz using some elderly Intel core. The newspaper this morning carries an ad from Fry's Electronics offering a wimpy '2800+ Sempron with motherboard' for $69 and that's the only AMD thing listed in their ad. Can't be much money for AMD at that price. It just doesn't look like the desktop computer market cares much about performance anymore.

AMD might be turning out some pretty good products but they are not making any money selling them and it is only a matter of time before they have to fold their tent and leave the field to Intel.

• DOS -- CP/M
• Windows 3.1 -- Apple
• Windows NT -- OS/2
• IE -- Netscape
• MS Word -- WordPerfect
• WinFS -- BeFS (and Cairo OFS)
• .NET/C# -- Java

There was an article in Network World (somewhat cheesy industry magazine) last week that talked about Walmart and Home Depot losing over 3% of thier revenue do to inventory procurement and tracking errors. The RFID tags played a role in reducing those costs. Basically, the suppliers would not get paid until the products left the store with a paying consumer. I seriously doubt that Walmart is giving up on the idea, they are probably waiting for the suppliers to catch up. When giants like Walmart and Home Depot say jump, the supply chain doesn't have to ask how high because they know it needs to be higher then last time.

Microsoft sticks rigidly to the iron-clad ideology that Microsoft and its shareholders are the only people who matter.

case in point

--
ba-bu-ba-ba-baaa, da-da-dum. Re-boot the ser-ver.
ba-bu-ba-ba-baaa, da-da-dum. Re-boot the ser-ver.

I'm sending this from the IETF meeting network in the Omni Shoreham hotel in Washington D.C. I was present for the entire discussion yesterday evening. This article is misleading, a definitive and final decision by the IETF was not made.

This discussion, held during the regular plenary session which is part of every IETF meeting, was simply another form of input to the IESG (Internet Engineering Steering Group) and IAB (Internet Advisory Board). The "vote" was not exactly as the reporter said, I'd say the number of abstentions was close to (maybe even greater than) the number of people opposing aiding wire-tapping. The reporter does not seem to understand the IETF method of discussion and consensus building.

For much better coverage of this story, I suggest reading the Network World article. It does a much better job of reflecting reality as I remember it.