Slashdot Mirror


Using Outlook From Orbit

Pigskin-Referee writes with this excerpt from Office Watch: "On the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station they use Microsoft Outlook 2003, but not quite in the same way that us earthbound Earthlings do. The space shuttle Atlantis is orbiting the earth right now and the crew exchange emails with the ground a few times each day. Bandwidth is a constraint and you don't want the busy crewmembers bothered with spam or unnecessary messages so NASA has a special system in place. The crew use fairly standard laptops running Microsoft Outlook (currently Outlook 2003) with Exchange Server as the email host, but they don't link to the server using any of the standard methods."

268 comments

  1. Bandwidth constraint? by Seriousity · · Score: 1

    Pah! In soviet spacestation we constrain bandwidth!

    --
    This post was made in complete sincere seriousity; as such any attempts to derive humour are doomed to instant failure.
    1. Re:Bandwidth constraint? by sakdoctor · · Score: 4, Funny

      When NASA first started sending up astronauts, they quickly discovered that Mozilla thunbird would not work in zero gravity.
      To combat the problem, NASA scientists spent a drunken weekend and $12 billion on Microsoft Outlook and Exchange licensing to develop a mail server that works in zero gravity, upside down, covered in stale beer, and old pizza boxes, and at temperatures ranging from below 10 to 25 degrees Celsius.

      The Russians used Mutt.

    2. Re:Bandwidth constraint? by skirtsteak_asshat · · Score: 3, Informative

      In space, no one can hear you throw a chair.

    3. Re:Bandwidth constraint? by gnutrino · · Score: 1

      Surely this is a latency rather than bandwidth issue

    4. Re:Bandwidth constraint? by theyulman · · Score: 1

      The funniest part is, even with $12 billion MS still failed to have that mail server working properly right here on earth...nice

    5. Re:Bandwidth constraint? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The Russians used Mutt.

      That's how you know the story isn't true. Russians would have used FidoNET, and GoldED as an editor!

    6. Re:Bandwidth constraint? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, bandwidth constrains you!

    7. Re:Bandwidth constraint? by matt_hs · · Score: 1

      That's how you know the story isn't true. Russians would have used FidoNET, and GoldED as an editor!

      Hey, I was a beta tester for GoldED, you insensitive clod!

      (Actually, I was . . .)

    8. Re:Bandwidth constraint? by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Latency? No, they're in low earth orbit, which is only 200 to 900 miles from the surface. A geostationary orbit (which is where regular communications satellites inhabit) is 22,236 miles, which is why communications over them involves a lot of latency.

  2. 80's tech by prgrmr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are using Outlook/Exchange like a BBS that sends in digest mode only.

    1. Re:80's tech by Tetsujin · · Score: 2, Funny

      They are using Outlook/Exchange like a BBS that sends in digest mode only.

      Actually the comparison is pretty much spot-on. When they're in transmission range, they download the day's messages as a QWK file...

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    2. Re:80's tech by Jawn98685 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can you say "FidoNet"?
      BTW, what's ZMH for Earth Orbit?

    3. Re:80's tech by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      Just seems like it could be done a lot easier shuttling around gzipped mbox files.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    4. Re:80's tech by Em+Emalb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, but it works. Don't see an issue here.

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    5. Re:80's tech by sznupi · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The question then is why use Outlook for such an awkward, for that tool, setup?

      Familiarization with it and therefore minimizing training needs? Hm, I guess Orion might use webmail (or generally web 2.0) UI...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    6. Re:80's tech by c6gunner · · Score: 5, Funny

      The question then is why use Outlook for such an awkward, for that tool, setup?

      It came pre-installed on the shuttle computers?

    7. Re:80's tech by Neon_Mango · · Score: 1

      QWK :). Thank you for making that reference, ah, memories.

    8. Re:80's tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NASA spent my tax dollars to buy Microsoft products to run on the Space Shuttle and ISS?! Fuck, shoot those fuckers down, anyone relying on Microsoft products in space deserves to go down in flames! Fuck, don't shoot them down, they'll crash on their own, just prevent them from rebooting every 3 days.

    9. Re:80's tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be more interested in what the zone *number* is. FIDO itself uses 1 to 6, of course, so it'd be natural to use 7, but there were many other FIDO-style networks that used other zone numbers, and needless to say, most of the lower ones in particular were taken (just like many of the "cooler" higher numbers; the highest I remember seeing personally was 2000, which was taken/claimed by a network called "NightNet" or so, IIRC).

    10. Re:80's tech by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We also would have accepted 'UUCP'.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    11. Re:80's tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They are using Outlook/Exchange like a BBS that sends in digest mode only.

      In that case, UUCP would be more appropriate since it is designed for burst-mode delivery of messages usually queued into a digest.

    12. Re:80's tech by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

      Why pay for an exchange license if practically all you need is mailman?

    13. Re:80's tech by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I'm just surprised that they have to do this at all. They're in LEO, not on Mars. Shouldn't they be able to manage communications at least as well as even the simplest communications satellite (which can do a LOT more bandwidth that little 4MB bursts)?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    14. Re:80's tech by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They're doing it to save bandwidth. Yet they probably spend more on bandwidth dealing with human error issues in the process than they would if the system was engineered properly in the first place.

      You don't see an issue because you aren't an engineer trying to save every drop of energy/bandwidth/processing time possible.

      Basically, you're a java or C# developer when then need C and assembly developers with a clue.

      Custom hacks when there are already systems (even build into EXCHANGE!) to do EXACTLY what they need to do are beyond stupid. Its one thing to use a custom hack so you don't get tied into a vendor, but their hack is entirely tied to their vendors so that rules that reason out.

      Next you do it because you have a requirement that no existing solution fills in properly, which is certainly not the case here. As I already said, even Exchange will be happy to do store and forward batching on a schedule. A tiny exchange server (or a more efficient/less resource intensive alternative) on the space station could be designed to consume pretty much no energy unless it was actually in use.

      In short, this is clearly something thrown together by engineers who knew nothing about the tools they were working with. Not their fault (probably), some douche bag manager probably didn't ask the IT guys.

      The problem is, they went through effort and resources to make a system that is clearly less efficient than any of the possibly alternatives I can come up with.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    15. Re:80's tech by gknoy · · Score: 1

      It's not a matter of signals being impossible. Rather, adding additional communications infrastructure to an existing space installation requires power, mass, and a rocket to take it up there. If they can use their existing (poor) connection speed, they can avoid all of that.

    16. Re:80's tech by Jawn98685 · · Score: 4, Funny

      We also would have accepted 'UUCP'.

      [weeps nostalgically]
      Dear gawd. can you imagine typing the "bang path" to get your mail to the ISS?

    17. Re:80's tech by jtdennis · · Score: 1

      I agree...I miss the days of FidoNet and offline mailers.

      --
      -- "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings" -Optimus Prime
    18. Re:80's tech by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Ease of use by the crew seems the most logical reason to me. I doubt in all that training is a week long class in learning how to use Pine.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    19. Re:80's tech by grishnav · · Score: 1

      Or rsync'ing a maildir. Seriously, NASA? This was the best you could do?

      Government programs for the win...

    20. Re:80's tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you right-click your Outlook icon in the system tray, there's an option called 'Work Offline'. That's pretty much what they're doing. My guess is they have Outlook running on a workstation on the ground to handle all the Send/Receive functions. They move the file to and from the space shuttle using some kind of FTP. Maybe even a Windows file share. The astronauts put the e-mail they're keeping in their PST. All the e-mails they send sits in the Outbox. When they copy the OST back to the ground, the Outlook client on the ground does the sending.

      Overall, this isn't that impressive, but it makes sense. The technology we were accustomed to when bandwidth was scarce works well on a low bandwidth link.

    21. Re:80's tech by stox · · Score: 1

      stox!ihnp4!seismo!nasa!iss!astronaut

      --
      "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    22. Re:80's tech by drfreak · · Score: 1

      Actually, that would have been astronaut@stox.nasa.gov!ihnp4!seismo!nasa!iss

    23. Re:80's tech by indi0144 · · Score: 1

      Why are they using Windows anyway? Really I'm Not so much a Linux (or anything else) fanboy but should not be this the scenario when you hire some badass assembly coder and create a byte-for-byte specific application for your needs? Running on top of Linux? Is not like an astronaut can learn to fly several tones of high tech metal in and out of the planet but not Linux, really? Whatever happened to the cutting edge and the state of the art we were used.

      Suddenly I don't feel so bad for not realizing my dream of becoming an astronaut.. I can imagine the first class: "Well class, this is a PC, it runs windows, windows it's like a desktop, you know, a dektop humm like in the office, you have a recycle bin and folders, and inside the folder there are documents..."

      No wonder why even the MASA can take a whale up to the moon for mere $200, I bet they use freeBSD all the way down :p

    24. Re:80's tech by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      I think the reason they'd do it this is way is latency. It's probably much more efficient to copy the OST file each way once, than it is to let Outlook or Exchange manage the synchronisation itself. More to the point, it's probably a bit more reliable, in that either it's synchronised (copied) or it's not. Outlook is pretty terrible to use on a flakey connection, and I don't think Exchange - Exchange communication would be much better. Additionally, you can use compression and/or differential copying along with the knowledge that it's a one-way, high-latency process to make the most effective use of your limited bandwidth. e.g. they can probably resume an incomplete transfer from where it left off, rather than restarting.

      their hack is entirely tied to their vendors

      I don't think their solution particularly times them to Microsoft. I mean yes they're using proprietary features specific to Outlook, but presumably they're doing it because they're already running Exchange and/or Outlook was the preferred mail client, anyway. Conceptually, there's no difference between moving an offline cache (the .ost) back and forth and moving a maildir or mbox or whatever. Pretty much every email client will support having two "locations", one which is local and one which is transferred back and forth, and allow the astronauts to drag-and-drop between the two. So if they wanted to switch, there's no reason they couldn't - they just go from copying an .ost to copying whatever format the new mail client prefers its mail to be in.

      Finally - reading and writing email isn't the reason they're in space, so a system that's simple and easily understood and doesn't require too much in the way of cleverness is exactly what you'd want. The only thing that I think is a bit crappy about their solution is that they have distinct "send mail" and "receive mail" cycles, when it wouldn't have been that much harder to have a single "sync mail" cycle instead.

      Personally, I would've gone with something much more complex - I never thought of using the Outlook cache in this manner, even though I have sometimes done similar things so I "knew" it was possible. I'm actually a bit impressed by the simple elegance of it.

    25. Re:80's tech by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      You're thinking about it from a tech geek perspective: wouldn't it be cool to have a NASAmail system in space?! OMG!

      Think of it from a "managing the space mission" perspective: why do they even need email in space? What value does it add to the mission? The answer is, very little. So if a simple, cheap, off-the-shelf type of solution that fits within the parameters (low bandwidth, doesn't interfere with other operations, etc.) can't be found -- the answer would be, no email. Most likely, they don't get the latest hi-def movies, either.

      They're astronauts. They're in space to do experiments we can't do on the ground, and things like that. Email isn't part of the mission.

  3. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No one cares. Honestly.

  4. Re:mail by TheKidWho · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh Man Oh Man Oh Man, You're still using the command line? You gotta, I say you just gotta teach me that Arcane forgotten art!

    Who needs a GUI when you've got the command line!

  5. If you scream... by terminalhype · · Score: 2, Funny

    In space, no one can hear you scream at Microsoft Outlook...

    1. Re:If you scream... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ground control to Major Tom,
      your laptop's dead, there's something wrong!
      Can you read me, Major Tom?
      Can you read me, Major Tom?
      Can you ...
      Here, I'm sitting at my laptop
      far above the world.
      My laptop's screen turned blue,
      and there's nothing I can do ...

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:If you scream... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Best... post... ever... Wish I had mod points.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:If you scream... by theyulman · · Score: 1

      Right on!

    4. Re:If you scream... by el_jake · · Score: 1

      Spot on!

      --
      In order to form an immaculate member of a flock of sheep one must, above all, be a sheep.
    5. Re:If you scream... by indi0144 · · Score: 1

      whats this referencing? curious minds would like to know.

    6. Re:If you scream... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  6. Wouldn't standard solutions be cheaper and easier? by Rix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why not just run a normal mailserver with a simple script to deliver any messages in the files uploaded? No need for the astronauts to mess with weird outlook files, just hit "check mail" on whatever client they prefer.

  7. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    For all those years i wanted to shoot outlook into outer space, and they already did...

  8. What about something a bit more immediate, but... by sznupi · · Score: 1

    ...not quite realtime or important?

    Yeah, I wonder what kind of IM they are using, if any (I know there were some sessions with Packet Radio and its "IM" functionality, though I'm not sure if that counts)

    PS. Thinkpads aren't ordinary laptops! ;)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  9. Not simply webmail? by Drethon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is it actually cheaper to upload all the e-mails in a burst instead of using a webmail system where only the mail the receiver wants to receive would be opened? Wouldn't work if they want to read offline I guess but the concern mentioned is bandwidth not connectivity.

    Any mail experts comment?

    1. Re:Not simply webmail? by Korbeau · · Score: 1

      Is it actually cheaper to upload all the e-mails in a burst instead of using a webmail system where only the mail the receiver wants to receive would be opened? Wouldn't work if they want to read offline I guess but the concern mentioned is bandwidth not connectivity.

      Any mail experts comment?

      If you read the article you notice that mails sent there are pre-filtered so everything is critical to read and contains no spam.

      So yes, uploading all mails neatly packaged together ONCE takes way less bandwidth than a webmail interface, even if it's a very lightweight one (think about it, Hotmail or Gmail probably transfers the same amount of data than 20 or more email messages just to display their fancy interface).

    2. Re:Not simply webmail? by jfried · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      But NASA doesn't not have to break SMTP to enable filtering. This is some insane system thought up by some no talent microsoft consultant.

      There is no reason for the solution that is currently in place, the only explanation is that the person who came up with it did not understand email at all.

    3. Re:Not simply webmail? by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      The web interface would waste more bandwidth than it saves.

  10. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You waster!

    I only transmit messages via telepathy!

  11. Yikes! by serutan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just knowing Windows is running in space kind of gives me the willies.

    1. Re:Yikes! by cashman73 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      They couldn't use a competing product, of course, because chairs fly a lot farther in zero-G!

    2. Re:Yikes! by mlush · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just knowing Windows is running in space kind of gives me the willies.

      Would you open Windows on the ISS???

    3. Re:Yikes! by k3vlar · · Score: 1

      I just had this incredible vision of Steve Ballmer in zero-g whipping a chair hard enough that it falls into a stable orbit. One of those plastic, foldable brown ones... maybe with the word "Microsoft" embossed on the back.

      --
      Unlike porn, which yada yada rimshot hey-ooh!
    4. Re:Yikes! by lewp · · Score: 1

      Really? I would think that's the safest place for it.

      --
      Game... blouses.
    5. Re:Yikes! by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      Just knowing Windows is running in space kind of gives me the willies.

      No joke. This seriously hampers any efforts to nuke it from orbit.

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    6. Re:Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, yes. I would think that your suit could protect you from vacuum with an open window more easily than it could, say, a Snow Leopard that was rather confused and irritable from being placed in zero-G.

    7. Re:Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    8. Re:Yikes! by xxuserxx · · Score: 1

      Well the Navy used NT for part of the Tomahawk weapons system so I think its fine that they use windows in space. Stop living in the past Windows is king.

    9. Re:Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Just knowing Windows is running in space kind of gives me the willies.

      Would you open Windows on the ISS???

      Only if I was under too much pressure...

  12. Architecture? by smitty777 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's too bad the article didn't address the architecture behind all this. I would be curious to hear what kind of network they use, and what sort of relays (satellite?). If it is satellites, why is the bandwidth so low? (Hmmm... maybe they really should have made that ethernet cable just a little longer after all...)

    --
    "Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
    Albert Einstein
    1. Re:Architecture? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The ISS is a satelite. The bandwidth is low because the science apps and data collection going on needs lots of space and email is not as high of a priority.

    2. Re:Architecture? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's too bad the article didn't address the architecture behind all this. I would be curious to hear what kind of network they use, and what sort of relays (satellite?). If it is satellites, why is the bandwidth so low? (Hmmm... maybe they really should have made that ethernet cable just a little longer after all...)

      It has actually already been covered on /.

    3. Re:Architecture? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I worked for the FAO, Flight Activity Office, developing applications about 15 yrs ago. These are the people who historically have provided email, fax and other document updates during missions to the astronauts for both shuttle and station missions.

      At the time I was there, the data connection was 115 cps (no KB) connection. The IBM laptops were running WFW 3.11 with battery packs duct taped to the bottom. I think they took 4 or 5 up with each mission. The modems were highly specialized. Voice communications weren't encrypted, so email or fax was the most secure method of communication available. Also, the flight network in the FCR building was completely separate from the rest of the network at JSC for security concerns. That really isn't true, there was an outbound TTL limited connection for real-time data, but that didn't leave the campus. No inbound connections were allowed except through an "introduction" workstation or 1 computer in the FAQ back room where we ran antivirus checks on the manually copied over email files. Sneakernet. That's how it was. I doubt they get full access to their normal Earth-bound mailboxes. Astronauts don't have time to read much email while on a mission. I bet it is still highly filtered by a real person.

      After I left, I understand they ran the JSC network into the entire control room for PCs so the controllers could check their email, but there was no mixing of flight control network with the JSC network (unless you wanted to be FIRED).

      I suspect the LEO network has improved, but I have my doubts about non-LOS networking. There are always places in orbit with no ground contact on every orbit. Now, I'd probably setup an extremely low power linux server as an email gateway on both sides and use UUCP since the connection is "sometimes connected", not always connected.

    4. Re:Architecture? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google TDRSS.

  13. Re:mail by multisync · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Who needs a GUI when you've got the command line!

    +1 Insightful

    --
    I don't care why you're posting AC
  14. Mail Server on both ends by jfried · · Score: 5, Interesting

    mail server on the ground, mail server on the shuttle.

    The mail queues up and you open up the connection between them certain times of day. Queue empties.
    GZIP the link and your gold.

    1. Re:Mail Server on both ends by topham · · Score: 4, Insightful

      yeah, no shit.

      seriously, their method is on crack. SMTP supports queue of mail, use the god-damn feature and us a compressed link for the exchange.

      put quotes on the uplink as necessary to prevent flooding (size, or number of messages) if it's an issue, but otherwise, where;s the problem to solve? SMTP worked when people used 1200bps modems for internet links.

    2. Re:Mail Server on both ends by tangelogee · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...I can understand the link, but why would I want to GZIP my gold?

    3. Re:Mail Server on both ends by jfried · · Score: 1

      Its obvious, I want my gold to take up less room :)

    4. Re:Mail Server on both ends by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      Or use it the same way I used it when I was on dial-up.

    5. Re:Mail Server on both ends by joey · · Score: 1

      Solved problem from the 1970's. Answer: UUCP.

      I suspect that NASA doesn't run servers on the ISS though. Their computer model seems to be ancient, proprietary, space-hardened embedded stuff for mission critical needs, and a pile of disposable laptops for crew needs. That's probably crippling their network infrastructure in many ways.

      --
      see shy jo
    6. Re:Mail Server on both ends by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except for a couple things:

      • I would assume that they don't want to put any more equipment up there than they have to. It's expensive to get stuff into space. So they might not want a separate mail server.
      • They probably don't want a live link, because they said they wanted to do really strict filtering to keep bandwidth low.
    7. Re:Mail Server on both ends by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Don't worry,

      Your government will be taking care of that for you shortly.

    8. Re:Mail Server on both ends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, that sounds very much like Lotus Notes and Replication...
      Works both ways too.
      Actually designed for low bandwidth.
      Only updates what changed.
      Totally transparent to the user.

    9. Re:Mail Server on both ends by Evil_Ether · · Score: 1

      Stop it falling out of your pocket?

      --
      If taxation is legalized theft, then Capitalism is a prolonged rape followed by a slow death.
    10. Re:Mail Server on both ends by StikyPad · · Score: 3, Funny

      Same reason you bzip your bronze...

    11. Re:Mail Server on both ends by poopie · · Score: 4, Funny

      The idea of NASA ground control needing to tell astronauts to "close outlook" on their massively expensive mil-spec laptops so they can do file transfers of OST files gives me acid reflux.

    12. Re:Mail Server on both ends by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      True, but with current tech one could build a mail server that would do all that, be shielded, rugged, and redundant, and put it in something the size of a hardcover book.

        Someone send NASA some Sheeva dev kits...

        ( I know, I know, gov procurement, etc. But still...)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    13. Re:Mail Server on both ends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They use standard lenovo laptops.

    14. Re:Mail Server on both ends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A mail server is a piece of software. You don't need extra equipment for it. Simply run a windows-based SMTP server on each laptop. Yes, the laptop has to be on to get the mail, but if you miss one broadcast you get the mails on the next one, no problem. The advantage is that you get to use standard software and the astronauts don't have close Outlook on a predetermined schedule, thus leaving them more time to do something productive.

    15. Re:Mail Server on both ends by totally+bogus+dude · · Score: 1

      SMTP doesn't support resuming incomplete transfers, so if they want to send/receive a large message they have to hope to get an uninterrupted link long enough to transfer the whole thing in one go. Whether or not their current copying method does resume is another question, but there's no reason it couldn't.

      Additionally, SMTP set-up is a transactional process, which adds a time cost to each and every message you want to transfer. Since you've got low bandwidth, you probably don't want to have many simultaneous transfers either, which would be the normal way of mitigating that cost. A bulk copy means you only incur that delay during the initial setup, and the copy itself can make use of wide windows and the usual methods for dealing with high latency.

      I'm assuming of course that they don't have a more-or-less continuous connection, and have limited windows within which you can send/receive emails - like the good ol' dialup days. Also, people didn't send HTML mail with funny pictures embedded when we had 1200bps modems. Sure, the astronauts could get by with text-only emails which would make the bandwidth requirements tiny, but that'd take half the fun out of having email in space, wouldn't it?

    16. Re:Mail Server on both ends by vegiVamp · · Score: 1

      To make gold-compressed latinum, of course.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
    17. Re:Mail Server on both ends by Myrv · · Score: 1

      Except for a couple things:

      • I would assume that they don't want to put any more equipment up there than they have to. It's expensive to get stuff into space. So they might not want a separate mail server.

      Any of the laptops they already have up there could run a mail server in the background without any issue. No extra equipment needed.

      • They probably don't want a live link, because they said they wanted to do really strict filtering to keep bandwidth low.

      Simply apply the filter on the ground based server before it relays the mail up. Or if you want more human control then just set up a number of private email addresses on the shuttle mail server and have someone on the ground manually forward incoming mail to the shuttle addresses. Still a hell of a lot simpler than what they're doing now.

    18. Re:Mail Server on both ends by netsharc · · Score: 1

      There's a few ISS tour videos on YouTube, and you can see they have dozens (!) of Lenovo ThinkPad laptops up there. Presumably they can just simply run a mail server on one of them, if not in native Linux then on CoLinux or a VM. They even have a W-LAN Access Point.

      Ah, then again, there's no room for an IT expert up there is there, so someone on the planet still has to do troubleshooting for regular users who just happen to be astronauts, so they'd want to make it as simple as possible for them. (Hmm if that's the case, wouldn't SSH be the best answer?)

      --
      What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
  15. Greetings Earthling! by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 4, Funny

    I am a Martian prince from the Splugorthian region of the Xylerom. I have inherited a bountiful estate worth 1.8345E8 drow'xlian that I must hide from the ruthless Prxyzzilic crime family. I am willing to share 20% of my fortune with you will allow me to deposit fund in your account. Please send me your account information if you wish to do business. Live long and prosper! Prince Ryzzriwz

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:Greetings Earthling! by Whalou · · Score: 5, Funny

      I am a Martian prince from the Splugorthian region of the Xylerom. I have inherited a bountiful estate worth 1.8345E8 drow'xlian that I must hide from the ruthless Prxyzzilic crime family. I am willing to share 20% of my fortune with you will allow me to deposit fund in your account. Please send me your account information if you wish to do business. Live long and prosper! Prince Ryzzriwz

      It's a trick! He's Vulcan.

      --
      English is not this .sig mother tongue...
    2. Re:Greetings Earthling! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Vulcans never lie!

    3. Re:Greetings Earthling! by Zordak · · Score: 1

      But Vulcans never lie!

      Sometimes they exaggerate, though.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    4. Re:Greetings Earthling! by meyekul · · Score: 1

      He's Vulcan.

      More importantly, does he have a goatee?

    5. Re:Greetings Earthling! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Vulcans never lie!

      If he is vulcan, and never lies, why did he say he was a Martian?

      Oh no! I am caught in an infinite loop! It must be one of those plain text exploits I read about!

      AHHH!! *no carrier*

      (Bonus, Captcha == "Rectify")

    6. Re:Greetings Earthling! by crakbone · · Score: 1

      Sounds Ferengi to me.

  16. Re:Wouldn't standard solutions be cheaper and easi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not just run a normal mailserver with a simple script to deliver any messages in the files uploaded? No need for the astronauts to mess with weird outlook files, just hit "check mail" on whatever client they prefer.

    This story hurts me in so many ways. Ow, stupidity... ow Microsoft... ow Twitter...

  17. Direct TV Satellite Internet...... by jameskojiro · · Score: 0, Troll

    I can get this is the middle of futt buck Kansas but they can't get it on the freaking ISS? Maybe someone shoudl call DirecTV and ask them to send some installers up and mount a few dishes on the damn thing.... Even if you you had to put a tracking dish on the thing it is doable and would provide a nicer link to the ISS plus DirecTV could use it for all sorts of Free bragging rights for their commercials,.

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    1. Re:Direct TV Satellite Internet...... by gblackwo · · Score: 1

      Direct TV's satellites are geosynchronous the space station is not- so I would think it is feasible in part of the orbit where there is line of sight- Otherwise, just upgrade the worldwide systems that already talk to the station for a thicker connection.

    2. Re:Direct TV Satellite Internet...... by f8l_0e · · Score: 1

      Except the shuttle isn't in a geosynchronous orbit, like the DirecTV satellite. Try redirecting your dish to something that's moving at over 17,000 mph.

    3. Re:Direct TV Satellite Internet...... by ubercam · · Score: 1

      A couple problems...

      1) Due to the fact that the ISS orbits Earth very quickly, with an orbital period of 91 minutes, you'd barely get your receiver up and running and locked onto the signal before it disappeared again. DirecTV doesn't work on the opposite side of the planet to the USA, and the planet definitely makes a better door than a window in this case.
      2) TV birds are generally spot beamed. Yes the ISS orbits much closer to Earth than satellites in geostationary orbit, but regardless, if you're outside of the spot beam, you might not get much of a signal. Also, as in my first point, the planet tends to get in the way.
      3) The astronauts presumably have much more important things to do, like trying not to screw up and kill everyone on board, science experiments, station maintenance/building, etc, than to goof around with some stupid satellite TV service.

    4. Re:Direct TV Satellite Internet...... by gblackwo · · Score: 1

      Honestly, it sounds like a pretty fun grad level dynamics problem. The orbital mechanics to track an object in orbit from the ground are calculated all the time, tracking an object in geostationary orbit from an orbiting object, i'm not sure if that has been done before- probably but not sure. Just because it is moving "fast" doesn't mean is isn't doable.

    5. Re:Direct TV Satellite Internet...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can get this is the middle of futt buck Kansas but they can't get it on the freaking ISS? Maybe someone shoudl call DirecTV and ask them to send some installers up and mount a few dishes on the damn thing.... Even if you you had to put a tracking dish on the thing it is doable and would provide a nicer link to the ISS plus DirecTV could use it for all sorts of Free bragging rights for their commercials,.

      That's because the Direct TV sats are in a geostationary orbit, meaning they're always over the same spot at all times. The ISS, however, is a moving object and not a fixed ground receiver. Due to its much lower orbit than any given comsat, it would still spend half of its time on the other side of the planet. When dealing with a line-of-site signal, having an entire fscking planet in your way kinda screws with reception...

  18. UUCP? by shutton · · Score: 3, Interesting

    UUCP worked quite nicely in the days when links were ephemeral, slow, or generally unreliable. This seems like a lot of effort to solve a problem that existed 30 years ago, solved, and even adapted for RFC821 and its successors. There's a reason that Sendmail knows how to rewrite addresses!

    --
    -Scott Hutton
  19. The lengths they go to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...to use Microsoft software.

    Because there’s limited bandwidth up to the shuttle it’s important to keep the OST fairly small so occasionally you’ll hear NASA controllers ask the crew to clean out their Outlook files

    They ask them, over a realtime voice connection, to clean out their Outlook files to save bandwidth. That's like sending "You've got mail" as a WAV file after transmitting a 1kB mail file.

    1. Re:The lengths they go to... by JoshuaZ · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except that the realtime voice connection is an old-fashioned radio. The bandwith needed for a staticky radio connection is effectively low.

    2. Re:The lengths they go to... by Nuskrad · · Score: 1

      But I assume they use analogue radio transmissions for that, not data

    3. Re:The lengths they go to... by joey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The ISS crew time needed to deal with mundane crap caused by their poorly designed computer infrastructure is, however, absurdly expensive.

      --
      see shy jo
    4. Re:The lengths they go to... by vlm · · Score: 1

      But I assume they use analogue radio transmissions for that, not data

      Nope all digital. TDRSS.

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

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    5. Re:The lengths they go to... by profplump · · Score: 1

      No, the bandwidth needed is really quite high, because the signaling system is really inefficient. You could send a lot more data over the same radio link if it was encoded more efficiently.

      The problem is they don't want to give up their old reliable voice comm system. That's probably a reasonable choice. But that choice eats a non-trivial portion of the bandwidth available for other communications systems.

  20. Sounds like a bad idea to me by Wannabe+Code+Monkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, once a day they bundle a bunch of emails into a single .OST file and upload it to the shuttle. The astronauts then open that .OST file in their local copy of Outlook. And they have to shut down Outlook while the upload is in progress because of Outlook file locking.

    In addition, communication with the ground isn't always possible (you'll hear warnings of LOS - Loss of Signal during mission communications) so standard methods of email transfer like POP/SMTP, IMAP etc might not be reliable.

    If a 'Loss of Signal' can interrupt a POP session, wouldn't it also interrupt a file upload? Couldn't they just POP into the server on Earth once a day to grab their emails to be stored in a simple mbox or some such? Wouldn't this also eliminate the file locking issue as mboxes and Maildirs are pretty old and stable solutions that don't have this problem? This just sounds like someone wanted to use Microsoft Outlook no matter what and hacked together a procedure to use it even though there are way better approaches. And isn't the whole point of Outlook that it has a built in calendar and meeting request system and network folders? They're not even using those more advanced parts of it, they just need email.

    --
    We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
    1. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey they are rocket scientist, not IT techs.

      What do you pretend next, that they know how to build a rocket?

      Oh, wait ....

    2. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I gather that the idea is that the OST stores the messages more efficiently than if you were trying to transfer individual messages. That's an important issue if you're operating with limited bandwidth. Also, the article implies that the messages are basically being hand-sorted into the OST file to prevent any waste in bandwidth.

      Beyond that, there's the issue of what protocols are best for this purpose. The article doesn't go into detail about how the OST files are being uploaded, but the protocol may have influenced the decision. For example, how does IMAP compare with FTP or HTTP in terms of efficiency? Does IMAP allow you to resume interrupted transfers? Does IMAP allow you to compress the data before sending it?

      This just sounds like someone wanted to use Microsoft Outlook no matter what and hacked together a procedure to use it even though there are way better approaches. And isn't the whole point of Outlook that it has a built in calendar and meeting request system and network folders? They're not even using those more advanced parts of it, they just need email.

      Are you sure they're not using the calendar or contact management? That stuff is stored in the OST file too. It doesn't sound to me like they were just fixated on Outlook, since they could have set up Outlook to download the messages through POP or IMAP if they had wanted to.

    3. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by LordKronos · · Score: 1

      If they have minimal bandwidth, then pop probably isn't ideal because of the back and forth communication. Also, I would suspect that to minimize transfer time, their file transfer mechanism uses compression (email is HIGHLY compressible). As far as I know, there's no way to do pop compression (though if the compression were implemented at the connection/tunneling level, then I suppose that would be transparent)

      As for your other question, there are resumable file upload/download methods.

    4. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by tool462 · · Score: 1

      If a 'Loss of Signal' can interrupt a POP session, wouldn't it also interrupt a file upload?

      If they could get a few more shuttles into orbit, they could probably use BitTorrent.

    5. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by noidentity · · Score: 1

      So, once a day they bundle a bunch of emails into a single .OST file and upload it to the shuttle. The astronauts then open that .OST file in their local copy of Outlook. And they have to shut down Outlook while the upload is in progress because of Outlook file locking.

      I can't help but think of all the inflexible systems I've used like this. "Do it our way, or do an end-run and have to do everything in a roundabout, manual way". It leads to solutions that have huge piles of crap wrapped in a simplifying interface, possibly repeated a few levels deep. It always seems to come from an original design that left no room for other approaches, instead acting like the only problems are those it acknowledges.

    6. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I believe they use Kermit for the transfer so LOS isn't that big of an issue since Kermit can restart.
      Yes this is a terrible kluge but.
      1. It works.
      2. They probably already use outlook in Nasa so no need to change anything.
      3. This was probably a hack they came up with a long time ago and is now procedure.

      Yes they could make their own mailserver and have Outlook use imap but that would mean putting a server on the Shuttle.
      So the simple answer is "It isn't broke so don't fix it" The shuttle is going to retire soon so the effort to make this any better is a waste.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    7. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by Wannabe+Code+Monkey · · Score: 1

      Beyond that, there's the issue of what protocols are best for this purpose. The article doesn't go into detail about how the OST files are being uploaded, but the protocol may have influenced the decision. For example, how does IMAP compare with FTP or HTTP in terms of efficiency? Does IMAP allow you to resume interrupted transfers? Does IMAP allow you to compress the data before sending it?

      (em, mine) I didn't say IMAP, I said POP. I would agree that with their situation that IMAP would not be ideal. However a once-a-day POP session to get the mail and a once-a-day SMTP session to send their mail should be very similar to their file transfers.

      Are you sure they're not using the calendar or contact management?

      Yes... from the article:

      Normally an OST file has all your email, calendar contacts etc but for shuttle crew the OST is just a container for exchanging groups of messages.

      --
      We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
    8. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      POPing into the server on earth willy nilly could be expensive. Think of the all the rocket fuel!

    9. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by Wannabe+Code+Monkey · · Score: 1

      So the simple answer is "It isn't broke so don't fix it" The shuttle is going to retire soon so the effort to make this any better is a waste.

      Yeah, but the article says that the ISS uses the exact same procedure, just that they can exchange messages a few more times per day and their messages can be larger because they have better bandwidth.

      --
      We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
    10. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      It still works. It is a pain but it still works.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    11. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      a $100 arm-based sheevaplug running linux is more than enough server and doesn't need much electricity.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    12. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by PsychoSlashDot · · Score: 1

      If a 'Loss of Signal' can interrupt a POP session, wouldn't it also interrupt a file upload? Couldn't they just POP into the server on Earth once a day to grab their emails to be stored in a simple mbox or some such?

      No. I could be wrong, but while something like FTP supports resume commands, I don't believe POP3 does. As far as I know, if you get 99% done RETR for a given e-mail and your socket drops, you have to RETR it again, from byte 0.

      I also assume that there's some latency issues involved with all of this. A straight RPC over HTTP connection to the Exchange server would obsolete all of this, but it's a really chatty protocol. I imagine they fell back to fundamentals for a good reason.

      --
      "Oh no... he found the .sig setting."
    13. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by atamido · · Score: 1

      You could compress the communications link pretty easily. Most VPN solutions do this by default.

    14. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by fm6 · · Score: 1

      And isn't the whole point of Outlook that it has a built in calendar and meeting request system and network folders? They're not even using those more advanced parts of it, they just need email.

      Dude, without the calendar feature, how are they going to know when to land?

    15. Re:Sounds like a bad idea to me by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      But it has to be "man-rated" for space flight or at least it used to. Things may have changed but COTS and manned space-flight just didn't jive.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  21. Time Zone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Do they have something to automatically change that every 30 seconds?

  22. Old technology is new again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this how e-mail worked only 20 years ago? I remember only getting mail two times a day at my university for a year or two because that was the only time the mail server dialed upstream and exchanged mail. Congratulations to NASA for reinventing old technology. Next up, if only there were some kind of small device that would let you add two numbers together and give you the answer.....

  23. Re:mail by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 4, Funny

    They have to be very careful in a close environment such as the shuttle or the space station to keep the air healthy. Using mailx like you do would give off too much smug for their filters and cleaners to handle.

  24. Re:I have avatar depression... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must mean: go to sleep.

  25. Re:mail by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    You waster!

    I only transmit messages via telepathy!

    You didn't really think about the security issues, did you? How do you know if some unauthorized third person listens tro your telepathy stream?
    Don't tell me you're able to do real-time RSA encryption in your head!

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  26. Limited bandwidth or bloated files? by RDW · · Score: 1

    'The crew use fairly standard laptops running Microsoft Outlook (currently Outlook 2003) with Exchange Server as the email host...Because there's limited bandwidth up to the shuttle it's important to keep the OST fairly small so occasionally you'll hear NASA controllers ask the crew to clean out their Outlook files'

    I say we take off and re-install the entire OS from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

  27. Nuke Outlook From Orbit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the only way to be sure.

    1. Re:Nuke Outlook From Orbit by CompMD · · Score: 1

      In Soviet NASA, Outlook nukes YOU from orbit.

  28. Re:What about something a bit more immediate, but. by gblackwo · · Score: 1

    CB radio?

  29. Should be investigated by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As there is a new President in the Office and he doesn't really like (it seems) fantasy and unrealistic plans, he should also order his IT guys to start an investigation why standard, documented protocols like IMAP, XMPP aren't used. A visit from a Internet2 academic could be enough...

    In fact, it is an International issue. ISS doesn't "belong" to USA, there are several billions of dollars of other countries out there.

    While on it, they should also ask NASA about why on Earth "NASA TV is best viewed fullscreen with Windows Media Player", why there isn't a standard MP4 based live broadcast, why it defaults to Windows Media regardless of your setup...

    Something really happening over there, trust me on that... These are the guys who had a genius idea of using Kermit as a protocol for communication before these "Outlook", "Windows Media Player" guys took over the job.

    If there are people thinking "Oh but MS is an American company", let me remind, Red Hat, Sun Micro, IBM and lots of standards bodies are American too... That is in case the multi hundred billion dollar project should be a billboard for pathetic software setups.

    1. Re:Should be investigated by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't need anything fancy. I was using UUCP to do bulk and batched transfers of email, Usenet feeds and even files back in the early 1990s. It's become obsolete in a lot of cases, because everyone went from low-bandwidth limited connection modems to always-on broadband connections, but back in the day, I got all my email, newsfeed and even the odd file a few times a day via a scheduled UUCP transfers (which also sent any emails and posts I might have). Ah, the good ol' days of bang paths! Still, UUCP has its purposes, and it strikes me that it is a well-established protocol designed just for this sort of environment.

      It just goes to show you how much damage has been done to tech by Microsoft, and this pervasive psychological need to use its shitty software, its shitty file formats and its shitty protocols, even with an organization populated by people who should be intimately familiar with Unix and its own much more rigorous and time-tested protocols. I mean, this is nothing more than FTPing mbox files back and forth, which, twenty years ago, would have had anybody with a moderate knowledge of mail systems and communications protocols rolling on the floor laughing.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  30. Re:mail by Shakrai · · Score: 1

    Don't tell me you're able to do real-time RSA encryption in your head!

    DjEU3D*c.A893DK56GIXCmxk35DQd9Am5F(2FGvn.S1@d(Ak3DFmCx*(FkdAi3AKCqA83JMDwq

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  31. verbs and wishful thinking by StandardDeviant · · Score: 2, Funny

    If only that headline used "Nuking" instead of "Using" Outlook from Orbit.

    My company recently switched from a really screwball lotus notes install to msexchange and thereby screwed every unix and mac user -- which is to say, 95% of the technical staff. Some of that I can't blame MSFT for, we do have some real chimpanzees on our email team, but the experience does have me shaking my fist in Redmond's direction even more than usual of late.

    1. Re:verbs and wishful thinking by cptdondo · · Score: 1

      msexchange

      Am I the only one who read that M-Sex-Change?

      Must be my 3D Porn glasses....

    2. Re:verbs and wishful thinking by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      your the 1st person I have EVER heard complain about going away from notes. Im not going to get into an Exchange vs Sendmail or other web based email arguement, its besides the point.

      But NOTES?

      Run a damn windows VM for your email/Office and call it a day. Notes is by far the worst mail client ever invented. CC:Mail is better than Notes. MS Mail is better than Notes. PINE is better than notes. It handles attachments better too.

    3. Re:verbs and wishful thinking by atamido · · Score: 1

      Exchange supports IMAP and POP, plus there are Linux clients that can interact with it. And the web interface for Exchange 2010 is excellent, probably better than using Outlook as you don't have to load such a huge program. There are reasons to complain about Exchange, but being a *nix/Mac user is not one of them.

  32. Re:mail by Bai+jie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thats the beauty of telepathy! You only have to think about security to use it.

  33. Hi! I'm Clippy, your ShuttleBuddy Navigation pal by phonewebcam · · Score: 3, Funny

    I noticed you pushed a button on your console. Are you trying to steer your spacecraft? Please wait whilst Clippy ShuttleBuddy extensions for .NET 3.0 SP6 is installed, then after a reboot we'll get right on with that.

  34. then how? by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    "...but they don't link to the server using any of the standard methods."

    I bet they link to the server using WIFI...

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  35. Scary technology... by The+Redster! · · Score: 1

    Windows exists above the cloud!

  36. Funny thing is, they got infected once by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In fact, you should be surprised that Windows is _STILL_ running after a Virus has hit the ISS orbiting the planet.

    No kidding, Google it.

    It is particularly sad that NASA IT guys aren't obviously that pathetic to license Outlook from MS. Something really going on there, a lot of open source software/operating systems has NASA contributed excellent code in them.

    PS: I remember they also had Norton Utilities with "rescue diskettes" back in 1990s, it leaked while I was trying to find a way to manually uninstall norton...

  37. Re:mail by lorenlal · · Score: 2, Funny

    You and your command lines, I receive my email as boxes of punched cards!

  38. Re:mail by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    You may jest, but you can do a lot more, more easily, from a command line than a GUI on any platform. Even Windows. Try to

    ren antique???.jpg desk???.jpg

    in File Manager (or whatever they call it these days). If you have 500 pictures of antique desks named antique001, antique001, etc it would take forever to rename them desk001, desk002, etc in a GUI.

  39. Dr Who ... by electricprof · · Score: 1

    Doesn't the use of Microsoft products in space violate article 3 section 47 paragraph 3 of the Shadow Proclamation?

  40. Congratulations NASA, you've caught up with 1978! by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I was doing this 20 years ago with UUCP and/or sendmail.

    HELO mx1.ground.nasa.gov
    EXTN
    QUIT

    Push queued mail on demand to the orbiting mail server. Cron up the EXTN trigger or setup sendmail (which its happy to do) to handle the queuing whever you want.

    Guess what, it works with exchange too!

    I guess NASA spends its money on aeronautical engineers and not computer system admins. I'd be willing to bet that I could do it cheaper and more reliably even with exchange than there method, in their constraints of bandwidth and available connection time.

    Seriously, I ran a FIDOnet hub, its not hard. :)

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  41. Meeting Request by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    From: Oleg Kotov
    To: CC Ops Ground Control
    Subject: Check out what the toothpaste does in zero-G!

    Location: COLBERT Room
    Start Time: 2009-01-13 1745
    End Time: 2009-01-13 1800

    [Accept] [Decline] [Decline with comment] [Delegate]

  42. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, renaming your porn archives. The reason I learned Ruby.

  43. In Other Words... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    In other words, it's a really shitty reimplementation of UUCP mail transiting.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  44. Re:mail by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It would be insightful if it were talking about something else.

    Using the command line to read email is hardly a 'good' way to go about it.

    It works and is usable for some, but even most shell users use 'a gui' like Pine or the like.

    Its cute that you think you're bad ass cause you and the parent suggested the command line, but it just shows you're trying too hard to be something you aren't.

    There are times to use the command line, and times when it is more efficient. Reading your daily email isn't one of those times, regardless of how cool you think it makes you to do so.

    You aren't old school, you're just dumb and inefficient.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  45. Re:mail by suso · · Score: 1

    Oh Man Oh Man Oh Man, You're still using the command line? You gotta, I say you just gotta teach me that Arcane forgotten art!

    Who needs a GUI when you've got the command line!

    This is just like how someone was telling me it was 2009 and wondering why I was still using vim. And he was telling me this on an IRC channel. Pot, meet kettle.

  46. Re:mail by suso · · Score: 1

    Porn of antique desks? Whatever floats your boat I guess.

  47. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean CTRL+A, right-click, rename, (type filename), enter takes forever?

  48. Re:mail by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    whoa, pine has a ui not a gui (graphical user interface).

    the way most geeks talk, the things that the curses library can do come under the phrase "command line", like the text w3m or lynx interface

  49. Re:mail by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Whys that? Because the terminal window on your monitor takes less energy to display? Nope, thats not true without using an LED display (not LED backlight, the entire thing has to be LED or it doesn't make a difference).

    You think that just displaying a GUI consumes energy? Please provide a citation. Any GUI on a modern OS doesn't require any processing power for displaying something on the screen that is static. You update the screen to current and it sits there.

    Outlook isn't constantly drawing the entire display for each frame of your monitors refresh, the video card is, and it works the exact same way regardless of using the command line or a gui app, especially since you probably would end up using a terminal client on a system running in GUI mode and not traditional text console mode anyway.

    Then couple in the additional wasted time from the incredibly niave and out of touch with reality since you have the idea that YOUR mail client is some how more efficient than theres.

    Its cute that you have tunnel vision and are a retarded fanboy rather than having any sort of logical thought on the issue.

    Good job, you've once again reassured my previous experiences that contrary to popular belief, MIT produces nothing but ignorant douche bags who think they know a lot more than they actually do.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  50. Re:mail by BitZtream · · Score: 1

    parent post++

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  51. Re:mail by nmb3000 · · Score: 2, Informative

    You may jest, but you can do a lot more, more easily, from a command line than a GUI on any platform. Even Windows. Try to

    ren antique???.jpg desk???.jpg

    in File Manager

    In Windows: CTRL+A, F2, "desk", ENTER.

    Admittedly that gives you names like "desk (01).jpg" and not "desk01.jpg" but it's close enough. If you want a significantly higher level of control, try something like Flexible Renamer (somewhat prone to crashing, but the most versatile and powerful I've found).

    --
    "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
    /)
  52. Re:mail by vlm · · Score: 1

    ren antique???.jpg desk???.jpg

    mmv "antique*.jpg" "desk#1.jpg"

    Owning an in dash car mp3 player since roughly the millenium, which only really understands 8.3 filenames, I've gotten pretty handy at renaming downloaded audiobook mp3 files ...

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  53. You have it wrong by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    In Soviet space station, bandwith constrains YOU!

    (was that the first "in soviet russia" joke that was actually factally correct?)

  54. Re:mail by youn · · Score: 1

    LOL... you should try smoke signals :)

    --
    Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p
  55. Re:What about something a bit more immediate, but. by BitZtream · · Score: 0

    IM? They don't. Unlike the massive amount of retards that IM all sorts of shit, this are intelligent people who probably just use the old tried and true method of calling them up on the radio or yelling down the hall if its onboard.

    IMs - Email for those who don't realize nothing they do is so important that someone else has to know/answer RIGHT NOW!@%!@%!@%!@%@#^@#^!

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  56. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it would take forever to rename them desk001, desk002, etc in a GUI.

    There's an app for that.

  57. Re:mail by jgrahn · · Score: 1

    It would be insightful if it were talking about something else. Using the command line to read email is hardly a 'good' way to go about it. It works and is usable for some, but even most shell users use 'a gui' like Pine or the like.

    OK, so mailx(1) isn't the perfect mail client (didn't support MIME, last time I checked). But Nasa using Outlook, a sucky client tied with a proprietary interface to MS Exchange -- what's up with that?

  58. This hurt to read. by zippthorne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These OST files are tiny by ground-based standards – around at most 4MB for shuttle crew.

    Amazing. A just over a half-dozen people and yet they manage to keep their email communications down to just 2,000 pages of text a day! How do they manage.

    The OST file, now with outgoing emails, is copied back to NASA on the ground where the messages are sent, copied to the Sent Items folder and any new email is placed in the OST ready for the next upload.

    Well, that makes sense. They reply with the same type of file that they receive with. If it's good for bandwidth one way, it's good for bandwidth the other I'd guess.

    Because there’s limited bandwidth up to the shuttle it’s important to keep the OST fairly small so occasionally you’ll hear NASA controllers ask the crew to clean out their Outlook files (the OST).

    Whajah? They're sending the *entire* mailbox both ways and just bouncing the same messages back and forth every time? How does that save bandwidth? How do these guys send pictures to each other, zip up an image of the entire hard drive?

    I guess that explains why they need to transfer 2,000+ pages of text every day.

    This sounds cumbersome and messy

    True. Because it is cumbersome and messy.

    it’s certainly not the way you’d do it here on the Green Hills of Earth.

    It's also not the way I'd do it in space either, because of the bandwidth constraints.

    However it makes sense

    No it doesn't. Not under any circumstance does "send the whole thing back and forth every time" make sense if the thing you're trying to conserve is bandwidth.

    You might also hear ‘CapCom’ asking the crew to shut down their copies of Outlook so that an OST transfer can occur. Outlook puts a file lock on any PST/OST file which prevents any copying (a problem anyone trying to do an Outlook backup might be familiar with).

    Ahh, so that's it. They're not trying to conserve bandwidth. They're trying to conserve "thinking about it." Otherwise, they'd only have to shut down outlook when renaming "file.ost.xfer" to "c:\...\outlookdir\file.ost"

    In addition, communication with the ground isn’t always possible (you’ll hear warnings of LOS – Loss of Signal during mission communications) so standard methods of email transfer like POP/SMTP, IMAP etc might not be reliable.

    True. Why does it need to be email, though. Why can't they just send a psk-31 HF radiogram? or the even more fault tolerant HF packet radio? You only need a transmit station somewhere in the same hemisphere for that to work.

    Hell, with a directional antenna (and a doppler-compensating transmitter), there's no reason why they couldn't use 3G cell service when over a country which has it. 300 miles up gets you a window of up to 11 minutes which would let you download quite a bit.

    But I don't think bandwidth is really the issue. There's enough bandwidth to transmit live video for pete's sake, but email is somehow a problem? The issue is that "outlook is email." It clearly has simply never occurred to anyone in the chain that there might even be any other way to handle email-type communications.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    1. Re:This hurt to read. by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Why can't they just send a psk-31 HF radiogram? or the even more fault tolerant HF packet radio?"
      The Ionosphere maybe. It will tend to block HF and one of the reasons HF is so good for long range on earth is that it can bounch and skip off the Ionosphere.
      At best you would still just get line of site and the antenna would have to be very large.
      You would be better off using VHF,UHF, or even Microwave since you could get more bandwidth.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    2. Re:This hurt to read. by xxuserxx · · Score: 1

      Im sure they have cashed mode toggled.

    3. Re:This hurt to read. by aXis100 · · Score: 1

      Whilst they are sending the while inbox/outbox every time, they are also manually moving everything from the inbox to their personal folders whenever something arrives, so that the .ost is practically empty. Only the new incoming or outgoing mails remain.

      Still, it's a shitty method.

    4. Re:This hurt to read. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please stop replying to every sentence individually. Really. Knock it the fuck off.

    5. Re:This hurt to read. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sight*

      Thanks for the entertainment.

    6. Re:This hurt to read. by s122604 · · Score: 1

      "Why can't they just send a psk-31 HF radiogram? or the even more fault tolerant HF packet radio" Well, they could use the aforementioned modes, just not on HF. I'm not saying there would be a point to doing that, but there is nothing saying you couldn't do PSK-31 on 330MHZ if you wanted to...

  59. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> Using mailx like you do would give off too much smug for their filters and cleaners to handle.

    Imagine using mailx on a Mac!!

  60. NO WAY, USE THIS METHOD: by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 2, Funny

    I use a 2400 modem to call google voice and record the e-mail. Then my computer uses dragon to transcribe them back to digital, then print. I use fed-ex (Hey, not too many donkeys around anymore ya know?) to send them to my mail box. I retreive them from the mailbox by walking up hill in the snow both ways! (but replies go back to the mail box on a belt system).

    BEAT THAT!

    **note above challenge was tongue in cheek, nothing was real, and if you so much as are reading this post today, you've already won.**

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
    1. Re:NO WAY, USE THIS METHOD: by Xtravar · · Score: 3, Funny

      BEAT THAT!

      All the same, but with UPS instead of FedEx.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
    2. Re:NO WAY, USE THIS METHOD: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um... that would result in too many dropped packages.... I mean packets.

  61. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you have 500 pictures of antique desks named antique001, antique001, etc it would take forever to rename them desk001, desk002, etc in a GUI.

    Vista / Win7 both have this feature in the GUI.

  62. I was so hopeful... by Kozz · · Score: 1

    When skimming my RSS feed, I'd have sworn the headline had said, "Nuking Outlook From Orbit". Maybe my subconscious was imagining a one-upsmanship over "Will it Blend" to "Will it Nuke".

    --
    I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
  63. Re:Congratulations NASA, you've caught up with 197 by jgrahn · · Score: 1

    I guess NASA spends its money on aeronautical engineers and not computer system admins.

    Wasn't that what Larry Wall was doing at the JPL when he invented Perl?

  64. Scheduling meetings is a must! by gsgriffin · · Score: 1

    Glad to hear they have an Exchange server running the heavy load of emails. I imagine they really need it to schedule all those meetings on their calendars with each other. We all know have disconnected people can get when they never see each other face to face while working on the Space Shuttle. You constantly got people on either the upper or lower level, but you can never find them when you want them.

    --
    jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
  65. Re:mail by onepoint · · Score: 1

    I think I might have something slightly better and slightly better GUI.
    the web site is http://www.1-4a.com/
    he's got file renamer version 1.56

    I've done 6000 file renames, as a batch, without issue every week for 6 month or so. not 1 error yet.

    hope it helps

    --
    if you see me, smile and say hello.
  66. Re:What about something a bit more immediate, but. by sznupi · · Score: 1

    IMs - Email for those who don't realize nothing they do is so important that someone else has to know/answer RIGHT NOW!@%!@%!@%!@%@#^@#^!
    I'm sure you could find being more wrong very hard.

    IM is, on the one hand, quite instant in delivery, like voice. But, and here's where you are phenomenally wrong, it doesn't need immediate attention. It will be there when you feel like answering. Or not answering - because it's for things that aren't so important or so complex as the ones discussed in e-mails. Just one quick short message.

    Luckily I'm dealing with intelligent people who mostly communicate with me via IM/sms, because they know that a) voice communication is only for extremely urgent or important things (and as usual method of communication for very few of people close to me) or b) know that mail is mostly for important ones.

    Anyway, the main reason I'm asking is that one ubershitty IM network from my place ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadu-Gadu ) claims they were the first in space / on the ISS. While that is doubtful in itself (whether Roscosmos or NASA would allow this kind of software, whether it would connect), finding direct earlier example would be useful (and other than text communication via pocket radio)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  67. Re:mail by onepoint · · Score: 1

    excuse me, but there was no need to swear when you thought that.

    --
    if you see me, smile and say hello.
  68. Is As Bad As Using by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Outlook on Earth.

    Fuck the Evildoers.

    Yours In Perm,
    K. Trout

  69. Re:mail by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    There has, unfortunately, been a recorded instance of someone believing that they(ie. themselves directly, not their computer) receive email.

    Very odd.

  70. Re:mail by AsmCoder8088 · · Score: 1

    MOD PARENT UP

  71. Re:mail by joeslugg · · Score: 1

    Some GUI's include that sort of capability too.

  72. Re:mail by PhunkySchtuff · · Score: 1

    What is this "e" mail you speak of? I get my mail in envelopes...

  73. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    C:\>mailx
    'mailx' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
    operable program or batch file.

  74. Re:mail by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

    vim? Man I still use the original vi, get off my lawn you young whipper snappers.

  75. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may jest, but you can do a lot more, more easily, from a command line than a GUI on any platform. Even Windows. Try to

    ren antique???.jpg desk???.jpg

    in File Manager (or whatever they call it these days). If you have 500 pictures of antique desks named antique001, antique001, etc it would take forever to rename them desk001, desk002, etc in a GUI.

    That was true in like 1995. You can highlite the batch and rename one of the files and it appends the numbers on the rest starting with at least WinXP, maybe before then.

  76. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    aww man I totally would have if he wouldn't have TURNED INTO A DICKBAG AT THE END

  77. Re:mail by belmolis · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Actually, I'm a lot more old school than you think, enough that I hardly think that using mailx is a good diagnostic of being a badass. Nor do I think that using the command line really saves power. If you had caught on to that, maybe you would have realized I was joking.

  78. Interesting solution to NASA budget cuts... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
    ... so NASA taps into Micro$oft's advertisement budget instead!

    Where most here see only sheer stupidity, what this really is is an astute solution to a very real problem: tight-ass goverments who have no dime to spare for research!

  79. Re:mail by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

    Punch cards? Damn kids these days! I read my email in binary!

    --
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
  80. Re:mail by BikeHelmet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who needs a GUI when you've got the command line!

    Me?

    I'm sorry, but when something breaks, I fall back to my working computer (with a GUI) with access to Google. :P

  81. Re:mail by goodwid · · Score: 2, Informative

    You, sir, have obviously never heard of nmh, or its predecessor MH. It's a suite of command line tools for email, and in 20 years of reading email, I've found nothing that yet comes close to the power and capabilities of reading and processing email with nmh. Being able to search for email from multiple folders using regexp and shell scripting just isn't as easy as on any GUI MUA I've ever seen, and because it is just a bunch of single-task binaries, it's very easy to build a GUI or even web-based front-end for it. The only thing that got me to switch from using it as my primary email was the gmail interface, and labels vs. folders. If not for that, i'd still be using it daily, and not cuz of the cool/smug factor, but simply because it works, and works well.

    --

    The net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. -- John Gilmore
  82. Re:I have avatar depression... by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

    how can I fix it?

    Take a trip to brokeback mountain.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  83. Re:mail by drspliff · · Score: 1

    EBCDIC or 7bit ASCII?

  84. Re:mail by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    I select all, right click, and select rename-it from my context menu.

    The benefit is I get a live preview of my renaming, if I am doing something fancy.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  85. Re:What about something a bit more immediate, but. by t0p · · Score: 1

    Twitter?

    --
    http://ihatehate.wordpress.com
  86. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pico? Pfft, ricer.

    LIST
    RETR 1
    QUIT

  87. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did this get modded insightful?
    Pine is command line, not a gui.
    This post seems to be noise and ad hominem, and not insightful.

    How is using pine or mutt or the like dumb and inefficient. Explain how a gui is more efficient, please. Explain why a command line is dumb please.

    Looking at my gmail interface, there's very little difference between it and one of the advanced full terminal mail programs. It
    really doesn't transfer to a gui that well.

  88. Catchy title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the title gives new meaning to the term 'space junk'

  89. Re:mail by segin · · Score: 1

    You mean CTRL+A, right-click, rename, (type filename), enter takes forever?

    Glad you believe that works in your world, now, in the Real World, it does not work.

    In the Real World, you must rename each file one at a time.

    For the record, you can substitute F2 for "right click, rename". Works much faster AND does not require using the mouse!

  90. NASA by Ice+Station+Zebra · · Score: 1

    need another system administrator. Cuz the ones they have suck...stupidest solution ever.

  91. Re:mail by lannocc · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, but when something breaks, I fall back to my working computer (with a GUI) with access to Google. :P

    In my experience it's more often the GUI that breaks. 9 times out of 10 you still have the command line available in a failure scenario, and some of us are too busy/lazy to get to another machine with working GUI, so it really is beneficial to know how to get things done on the command line. Of course, you need a system that actually makes it possible to get things done from the command line interface (thank you Unix family!). Google is still reachable from the CLI :P

  92. Pleonasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Microsoft Outlook (currently Outlook 2003) with Exchange Server as the email host, but they don't link to the server using any of the standard methods.

    Because of [M$ POSS], they don't link to the server using any of the standard methods.

    There, FTFY.

  93. Re:Congratulations NASA, you've caught up with 197 by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

    Lets see they were using tech from 1948 in 1969 so that means.....yup 1978 sounds about right. Pretty soon they are going to put a microwave in the shuttle too. {insert microwave space joke here}

  94. Re:mail by multisync · · Score: 1

    Using the command line to read email is hardly a 'good' way to go about it. There are times to use the command line, and times when it is more efficient. Reading your daily email isn't one of those times

    Using a text-based interface isn't an efficient way of reading text? You're going to have to go a bit further to explain that position.

    Its cute that you think you're bad ass cause you and the parent suggested the command line, but it just shows you're trying too hard to be something you aren't ... You aren't old school, you're just dumb and inefficient.

    What are you, 12? Grow up, for fuck sakes.

    --
    I don't care why you're posting AC
  95. Re:mail by SCPRedMage · · Score: 2, Informative

    You got that backwards, actually - Outlook isn't tied to Exchange, Exchange is tied to Outlook.

    --
    My sig can beat up your sig.
  96. What?? by whoisisis · · Score: 1

    I read that as "busy crewmembers bothered with spam or unnecessary messages from NASA"

  97. what a waste by pydev · · Score: 1

    Instead of flaky Outlook/Exchange setups, they should use technology designed for low bandwidth and intermittent connections, like uucp.

  98. Re:Congratulations NASA, you've caught up with 197 by Abalamahalamatandra · · Score: 1

    Actually the command is ETRN.

    Back in the mid-90's, we used to use this with our ISDN customers who wanted to have their own email domains, but didn't want to pay for always-on ISDN. So we set up mail servers for them that would bring up the ISDN link, issue an ETRN command to our mail server, wait while the mail got sent, then shut the link back down. Worked great.

  99. Microsoft isn't bragging? by mikep554 · · Score: 1

    From TFA: It’s surprising that Microsoft hasn’t made more noise about the use of Microsoft Office in space

    Microsoft probably isn't making more noise about this because it is a TERRIBLE system.

    1. Re:Microsoft isn't bragging? by xxuserxx · · Score: 1

      Im sure you could design a better system then NASA engineers. Tool.

    2. Re:Microsoft isn't bragging? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hello Tool. What an interesting name! Bet you're really handy, eh?

      Im sure you could design a better system then NASA engineers.

      I don't know why you bring up "IM" when we're talking about email -- but to answer your question -- in this case, yes. Perhaps NASA should stick to blowing up shuttles and leave the IT stuff to professionals.

  100. Aliquid melius quam pessimum optimum non est by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

    or... just because it's not the worst, it doesn't make it the best.
    My god - now NASA controls the fortunes at the foot of the /. page !

    --
    Nullius in verba
  101. My idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not an Exchange admin by any means, but I can think of an easier way using Exchange.

    Set up Exchange clients to connect to a specific IP address.
    On the ground, let the "spam team" deal with clearing out the mailboxes of spam.
    Once complete, disable the IP address that connects to the world, and enable the IP address that connects to space. Let the space people do their thing, then when the spam team does their thing again, shut down the space link, open up the earth link, and let the queued messages flow in.
    Rinse and repeat.

    This allows minimal data transfer, as only changes are being synchronized, not the whole mailbox. It also allows the boxes to be screened.

  102. Re:mail by Nutria · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's called a TUI.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  103. Re:mail by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1. You received the mail with my family pictures. I need the one that has a picture of my house in it. Find it and send it back to me.

    2. You receive a ton of new albums in mp3 format, but since your mp3 player is short on space, you need to weed out the "interludes", which are each less than 1 megabyte. Save the songs, but delete the interludes.

    3. Take a link from the email, go to that website, and post the albums and pictures to the "cloud" for backup.

    Just a few things I'd think would really suck to do with a command line interface.

  104. Re:mail by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Google is still reachable from the CLI

    But are the web sites linked to by Google readable using lynx/links2/w3c?

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  105. Re:mail by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Python/Perl/Ruby would (probably) make your job easier.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  106. Re:mail by Zordak · · Score: 1

    Noob! I hold the ethernet cable on my tongue and decipher the signal with my nerves.

    --

    Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  107. Re:mail by daveb1 · · Score: 1

    In a word 'no'. PST i don't think he gets it :P

  108. Re:mail by Zordak · · Score: 1

    vi? I use a magnet to physically rearrange the bits on my hard drive

    --

    Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  109. Now we know... by YankDownUnder · · Score: 1

    ...where NASA blows it's financing. On Microsoft "can't bother to fix it" software. How trite. Instead of using free software, free OS's - developed for the scientifically minded, they're using brainless, costly, ineffective software products coupled with brainless, costly, ineffective operating systems. WAY TO GO NASA! Now it's clear why other "space related" groups are moving ahead in the game. Now the old joke makes sense, in a big way. "In the 60's, the US government and NASA spent millions of dollars to research and develop an ink pen that would function in a weightless environment. Meanwhile, the Russians used a pencil."

    --
    YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
  110. Re:mail by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

    Excuse me, but REAL programmers use Butterflies. We open their hands and let their delicate wings flap once. The disturbance ripples outward, changing the flow of the eddy currents in the upper atmosphere. These cause momentary pockets of higher-pressure air to form, which act as lenses deflecting incoming cosmic rays, focusing them to strike the drive platter and flip the desired bit.

  111. Re:mail by nmb3000 · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the suggestion, but looking at the page for that program it doesn't appear to support regular expressions. The biggest reason I usually use Flexible Renamer is it's ubiquitous support for regular expression (source files/directories, destination files/directories, grouping/matching, etc).

    --
    "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
    /)
  112. Re:mail by Nutria · · Score: 1

    Because the terminal window on your monitor takes less energy to display? Nope, thats not true without using an LED display (not LED backlight, the entire thing has to be LED or it doesn't make a difference).

    I've always wondered if a black background uses less energy on an LCD monitor than white.

    Not that it would make much difference in my case, since all of my urxvt windows are bg white.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  113. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not significantly high enough, and, in your words "prone to crashing."

    for i in *.jpg; do mv "$i" "`echo $i | sed 's/^antique/desk/'`"; done

    But that's complicated when you want to do something so simple? Poor baby. What you don't understand is the same technique works for other uses.

    for i in *.wmv; do transcode "$i" "$i.mpg"; done # convert all wmv files to mpeg (may require options to transcode to control codecs and whatever, I'm too lazy too look it up right now)

    for i in *.jpg; do convert "$i" "`echo $i | sed 's/jpg$/pdf/'`"; done # convert all these jpegs to PDF files

  114. Using Outlook from Orbit - unreferenced to source by nollaigoc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This story looks like a Microsoft troll. The link to the story http://news.office-watch.com/t/n.aspx?articleid=1329&zoneid=12 does not provide any link to NASA as a source. Without a source we must suspect a hoax. Sending a 4MB OST file to space back and forth sounds incredible, bandwidth wasteful, as information as text would be very large at 4KB per transmission. 4MB could be 2000 pages of text.! I have exchanged emails from the middle of the Atlantic Ocean on a yacht using SSB radio and a Pactor modem http://www.scs-ptc.com/shop/categories/modems-en at 2400bps. Why, because bandwidth over a HF radio link is limited. There are many lightweight email clients and command line equivalent email clients that can communicate without the noise associated with animated smileys and gifs. The message is important, straight ASCII, tells it all. The medium here is not the message.

  115. Atlantis is on the Ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The summary isn't clear about this, but the quoted article is from mid-November. Atlantis is not currently orbiting--she's in processing for STS-132.

  116. Sounds like a job for UUCP by drfreak · · Score: 1

    I often look nostalgically back and think of the old bang paths for e-mail. Boy, I don't miss 'em! :)

  117. Re:mail by mattmatt · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    For 2 at least: find ~/music -size -1024k -exec rm {} \; Something like that, anyway.

  118. Re:mail by StuartHankins · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Mod parent up. Some of us have written scripts to manage files that do the same basic thing (only my scripts typically remove files older than xx days from certain folders regardless of size). Put it in cron and forget about it.

  119. Re:mail by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up. Why do GUI's suck for a seasoned admin? Because we can do things in a shell that aren't possible using the GUI. And we can automate them.

  120. No wonder its called lookout. by rgfranks · · Score: 1

    My iPod Touch probably gets a hell of a lot more email than 4MB per day and deals with tricky issues such as Loss Of Signal. Talk about a solution looking for a problem.

  121. Hmmm by Lost+Penguin · · Score: 1

    TCP over meteorites?

    --
    I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
  122. Re:mail by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    that word is a recently invented retronym, newer than the term GUI. another term used is CUI, console user interface. be fun to see which term is older.

  123. Re:mail by Nutria · · Score: 1

    recently invented retronym

    For what value of "recent"? 10 years, at least.

    CUI, console user interface.

    I'm trying to remember what we called the TurboPascal interface, when comparing it to GUIs like the early Macs.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  124. Nuking it from where? by DaTrueDave · · Score: 0

    What do you mean it's the only way to be sure?

  125. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amateur, i ram a BNC connector up my fundament, a terminator up my left nostril and decipher MIME with my colon...

  126. Don't do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In all probability this would be a most effective means of attracting Borg cubes.

  127. Can't at least NASA use Linux? by mark-t · · Score: 0

    I mean, what does it say if Linux is too complicated even for rocket scientists to use?

  128. Re: rsync by nullchar · · Score: 0

    Agreed, rsync would be more efficient. No need to move messages to local storage.

  129. Re:mail by indi0144 · · Score: 1

    Thats why I stare to an A-Team poster whenever I'm doing my telepathy.

  130. Re:mail by indi0144 · · Score: 1

    Options for accessing this content:
    You can purchase online access to this article for a 24-hour period. </quote>

    O rly? 24 hrs? such a bargain!! //srcsm

    Care to link to somewhere else where we all kind of read the content? like, the 99% of the Internet?

    It's been like 1 year since I can't use html tags, just saying.

  131. OSI Model, anyone? by DavidD_CA · · Score: 1

    We've all learned about the OSI model.

    It seems like these guys are going through great lengths to hack the application layer, when this is really the fault of the transmission layer.

    Why not come up with a better protocol than TCP/IP or the radio protocol or whatever the heck it is that they're using, and then tune the OS to work off that stack and hand it over to Outlook as standard network data?

    --
    -David
  132. Outlook 2010 - A Mail Odyssey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Open the OST file in Outlook, HAL.

    I'm sorry, Dave, the file is already in use. What are you doing Dave? Dave, let's talk about this.

    Daisy... daisy...

  133. Re:mail by atamido · · Score: 1

    I've always wondered if a black background uses less energy on an LCD monitor than white.

    If anything it would use a tiny bit more because the LCD default state is clear, with energy being required to turn it black. (This is why a digital watch shows no numbers if the battery is dead.) But the difference in power would be extremely minuscule.

  134. Re:mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But you know what a GUI is good for? Viewing those images :)

  135. Re:mail by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    Odd. It just pops right up for me, and I'm not in a university IP block or anything, just basic residential DSL.

    Anyway, article is called "Delusional experience of self as receiver of email in schizoaffective disorder" google might have something that works for you.

  136. Re:mail by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    You think that just displaying a GUI consumes energy? Please provide a citation. Any GUI on a modern OS doesn't require any processing power for displaying something on the screen that is static.

    Displaying GUI itself is several thousands, if not millions of lines of code. Same goes for any "modern OS".

    Command line driven email client can be implemented on a low-power 1KHz PIC microcontroller that takes a few microamperes of energy to operate. Static LCD display, built-in RS232 at 9600 for communication, and you have a device that takes under 1 milliampere at 5V, that is 0.005 watts to operate (when not in sleep mode where it takes 1% of that.)

    I'm not saying it's practical or reasonable, but if your point is minimizing energy requirements, there is a point where GUI has to go.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  137. Re:mail by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    depends how it is done.
    Some LCD displays (in calculators) have polaroid filters separate, not embedded in the glass. Rotate it 90 degrees and you have white digits on black background. No electric change whatsoever.
    LCD pixel switched on (crystal ordered, color) uses minimal amounts of energy vs pixel switched off (unordered, transparent) using no energy at all. Thus in backlit displays white uses less energy than black (transparent, no obscuring of backlight) while in reflective displays, black uses more energy... unless the polaroid is reversed in which case white does...

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  138. Re:mail by Gonzoman · · Score: 1

    I use 5 bit Baudot code on punched tape. RYRYRYRYRY....

  139. Re:mail by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    Hey! Thanks for the info, that's the desktop I use at home! I haven't looked at documentation in years, maybe I should start.

  140. hmmm...terminal based...? by CremIon · · Score: 1

    If the objective is to save bandwidth...whatever happened to pine/elm/mutt/emacs ?! :D

  141. Re:mail by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    GUI is over 25 years old, word TUI isn't otherwise I would have known about it (I've been doing this shit since early 70s)

  142. Re:mail by Nutria · · Score: 1

    TUI isn't otherwise I would have known about it (I've been doing this shit since early 70s)

    I've "only" been doing it (academically and professionally) for 25 years.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1