I enjoyed Mortal Kombat but that may have been partially due to a "contact high" of enthusiasm from the 13yr. old boys sitting two rows in front of me.
From the nytimes article:...he hooked up with Ms. Sachs, a former producer with Geraldo Rivera who later worked in marketing at several Internet companies.
That was kind of refreshing to read. It indicates that the scuzz at the bottom of the gene pool isn't getting bigger, it's just recirculating. That's my delusion and I'm sticking with it!
this will probably get used for pr0n, and do you really want to watch pr0n in the same room with your cow-orkers?
Why would I want to watch the same pr0n as them anyway? They can have all the little people and bungie cords they want, it's all lunchmeat, all the time for me;-)
...and when using a network transfter protocol that doesn't understand the metadata in question
I think that's more the fault of the transfer servers and clients rather than the protocols (the protocols shouldn't have to care) but it's still another important case. I guess my point was that while the environment or implementation makes file streams problematic, the concept of file streams, at least for use by metadata, is a good one. For multiple data streams I think something like OS X's bundling (which is pretty much just a directory with a special bit set) is more appropriate. I could believe there are instances where multiple data streams in a single file is a good idea, I just can't think of any.
Nope. Server has tools for setting up shares, user accounts, web server configuration, etc. which do not come with OS X. Then there's stuff that *isn't* included with OS X at all like Worgroup Manager. I'm not sure about NetBoot, I'm sure any AppleShare volume can be used as the boot source for NetBooting but I don't know what other features go into running a NetBoot server.
NTFS supports streams but pretty much the only use it gets is preserving Mac resource forks on Mac shares. NTFS actually goes beyond the Mac resource fork by supporting not just 2 streams but many (either 255 or "unlimited," I don't remember which).
The concept of supporting at the filesystem level data and metadata together is awesome. It's much cleaner than trying to stash metadata at the beginning or end of the data stream using a myriad of formats. It's only a problem when dealing with other filesystems which don't have such support.
Pretty much, at least between OS X and the unlimited client OS X Server. I don't know what they do to limit you to 10 clients for that version. I saw in the latest update that Server comes with Apache 2.0 (in addition to 1.3.x I think) but for the most part Server is just a set of GUI tools for controlling what's on any OS X. But they're good tools.
unless you use a really feeble definition of "adware." QuickTime Player *is* nagware, what with the "upgrade to QuickTime Pro" message which regularly appears when you launch it. The only ads are those which appear when you launch Player by itself instead of how it usually gets launched, by clicking on a QuickTime link or file. Apple calls these "HotPicks" and the Preferences include a checkbox to turn them off. It's silly to complain about something so innocuous which can even be turned off!
At the moment the HotPick is "click to hear Fleetwood Mac's new album 'Say You Will'."
I think ad-supported applications can be a good thing as long as they're not too in your face. Eudora's ad-supported option, for instance, is reasonable.
Just to nitpick, QuickTime is not a codec but it's very good that people are working on totally free alternatives to patented-encumberd codecs.
Please provide evidence that there is a high-end, non-free version of QSS. Real and Microsoft may do it that way, Apple doesn't. QSS is the razor and the blades are QuickTime Pro (plus other software) and the license fees people pay to provide QuickTime installers (possibly not that big a factor in these post-CD-ROM times).
I think ragingmime's theory that NPR wanted Apple to somehow sponsor their QuickTime streams (by paying for some/all of the bandwidth used perhaps) is not bad. It's sheer speculation but plausible.
You actually have to do your homework? OMG, more violations of the Geneva Conventions!
The security part needs improving but overall this sounds like a good idea. Homework assignments are all recorded in one place so everyone knows what was assigned, no disagreements or confusion not just between parents & students but also students & teachers. Of course parents should talk to their children about school and their homework but this site shouldn't serve as a substitute but rather a starting point, one which eliminates the dreary recitation of what homework was assigned.
Google doesn't provide a "user experience", it provides a search engine, and nothing more.
This is all it takes to get marked up as Insightful? You're so wrong. Of course Google provides a user experience, it's a sparse, efficient, targeted experience which stands in great contrast to so many other sites. A lot of time, effort, and testing goes into finding new things to offer while maintaining that Google experience. Haven't you read the articles about how careful they are, particularly when they introduced Google News? And calling Google News can hardly even be called a "search engine."
Producing a good user experience may not require elegant logarithms or take advantage of latest CPU but it's challenging work and it's important. I appreciate good work in the field and whether you realize it or not, so do you.
Yes and even at non-public universities, the university uplinks are often through a non-profit which has clauses about non-commerical use. It's not like the do content scanning or anything but it's not cool to go bitching because network problems are intefering with a business that you're not supposed to be doing over that network anyway.
Wow, that takes me back. Back in college, all my D&D/pothead friends loved The Wizard of Speed and Time. One of them had it on video. I remember enjoying it but I don't think I was sufficiently altered to enjoy it as much as they did.
BTW, MS has VBA, which can be used to do all sorts of shit on your PC, like Outlook viruses, Word viruses, etc, but Apple's AppleScript seems to be relatively secure whilst still providing enough functionality (see the bottom of this [apple.com]). Although perhaps it's because Apple's marketshare isn't seen as big enough for virus-writers to really take notice - I don't know.
It's mostly about market share. In OS 9 you pretty much were limited to conventional trojans because you can't really conceal the fact that a script was running. With OS X, they don't have that problem *and* there's all kinds of new ways to script things.
Another part of the market share is mail client, a prominent method of propogation. OS X's Address Book is very vulnerable to scripted access so a virus which uses Address Book and Mail.app to propogate is feasible. It may not happen quite as "under-the-radar" as it does in Outlook [Express] but it could happen.
Of course you still have to get your script to run. Windows is bad because Outlook and Internet Explorer (with ActiveX) have had a history of automatically running code with little to no user intervention. I don't think you can really get anything useful to run just by sending an email or having it open in OS X but tricking people to launch an attachment isn't too hard (elfbowling). On the Mac is easier to conceal what's executable since it doesn't depend upon filename extensions. People are accustomed to installers in OS X asking for an admin password so a phony installer could use that to do other stuff (I think real installers use something built into OS X so the password isn't exposed to 3rd party code). Most people run OS X as an admin and admins can do *anything* using sudo so with the logged in person's password, a trojan could quickly get root access.
OS X leaves has all its sharing options off by default but they can be enabled without prompting for a password (assuming the user is an admin, which they are by default). Appleshare, Apache, and Samba won't expose any useful data by default but they and SSH give crackers a remote avenue for buffer overflows password cracking and the user probably wouldn't even notice.
Just an update (tho' no one will read this), Mozilla crashed Windows again so replacing my profile didn't help. This time it crashed while I was using the mouse scroll wheel to scroll down in this page of JPEGs while it was loading (the mouse is a USB Kensington but I'm only using Microsoft's built-in mouse support). I've now dropped my color depth to 16 bit (for some reason I can't choose 2048x768 when the depth is set to 24bit) so we'll see if Mozilla crashes Windows any more.
Here's a hypothetical computer company. The company thinks it can save money by firing their U.S. phone support people and out-sourcing it to a company in India. The company's PC assembly workers get wind of this and say "if you fire our union brothers in phone support, we'll strike" (the assembly workers probably wouldn't be in the same union as phone support but separate unions often support each other.)The computer company can't send PC assembly overseas because they specialize in BTO options and the shipping time would kill them. So, the company keeps the phone support in the U.S. to avoid trouble with the assembly workers.
Or maybe the company just wants to send consumer phone support overseas but keep corporate & server support in the U.S. because those customers won't tolerate a drop in quality. But all the support people are in a union so they all threaten to strick if some of the jobs are shipped overseas. The company capitulates. Or if the company decides it can putlast the strikers or even afford to hire new corporate & server support people (and they can find them), the company does it anyway.
The is just a part of the way unionization is supposed to help workers.
They stopped selling a Red Hat Guest OS Pack well before the buyout was announced (someone I know found it missing in January but I think it went away in late Fall 2002). It's disappearance might still be tied to the buyout or they might have decided that it wasn't profitable (possibly because of how frequently Red Hat is updated compared to Windows).
The VPC for Windows Technical Reference PDFis still online and contains information about running various non Microsoft OS's. Even though it says "for Windows" almost everything applies to the Mac version as well because the emulated hardware is the same (yes, you can move virtual drive files between Mac and Windows versions of VPC).
The Connectix forum for VPC for Mac (as well as the one for Windows) also has a section dedicated to iscussing Linux/Unix as a Guest OS and another for "Other OSs." The forum moderators (I assume they work for Connectix) do participate in some discussions.
Mozilla makes my Windows (2000 Pro, SP3) freeze sometimes and I have a Matrox G450 DualHead (True Color, 2048x768 spanned across 2 monitors). It's not a true BSOD but video doesn't change, it won't accept any mouse/keyboard input, if an MP3 is playing (WinAmp3 or MusicMatch7.5) it will finish playing but won't play any more, it will respond to a ping but won't open any connections (file sharing or via RPC). There's no record in the event log or anywhere else of what happened.
I tend to leave Mozilla running for days and usually have 3-12 tabs open. The freezes seem to happen as a page is loading, even if it's loading by using the Back button. I removed the Flash plug-in to make sure it wasn't causing it (plus it has happened on sites which don't use Flash like Penny Arcade). Yesterday I removed the entire Mozilla profile folder (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data\Mozilla\) let it recreate it then moved my bookmarks and cookies into the new profile. I noticed the registry.dat file was up to 390K which seemed odd. We'll see if it happens again but this thread makes it sound like a lower level problem. If it happens again, I'll try dropping the color depth down to 24bit.
That's not what the posting says. The school can't buy or license Microsoft products, but it sounds like faculty and students can certainly install whatever they like on school computers.
If the computer is running an OS other than Windows, practically speaking they're not going to be able to install Windows programs. They don't want to install an OS themselves (and certainly don't want to pay for it) and they shouldn't have to. What kind of service would the school be providing to its employees if they couldn't even give them the operating system they want? Why would a student be installing software on a school computer anyway?
A university like this needs a single, standard computing platform. Right now, that platform is Windows.
I disagree on both counts, they don't need a single platform and right now it is not Windows, at least not at the 5 colleges and universities I've had personal experience with. Macs are still very much in higher education. "Windows" isn't a single platform anyway, every version has differences which can be significant from a support perspective and schools can't afford to replace machines or upgrade operating systems to make every single machine run the same OS. It's more important to be standardized in certain application spaces, especially "office suites." This makes it feasible to switch away from something like MS Office but also shows how hard it is to do in a piecemeal way unless document conversion is rock solid.
They aren't talking about "taking all MS products off the campus", they are talking about not having the university make site purchasing agreements. Presumably, individual students, faculty, and researchers can keep buying whatever they like.
That's not what it says, it says NO software from Microsoft. They can't dictate what faculty and students buy with their own money but everything else, lab computers, faculty computers (unless perhaps it's bought with a grant), staff computers all have to be bought without Windows and run no Microsoft software. So what if a faculty member can buy Microsoft software if they can't run it on the school supplied computer? If it's okay to buy Macs (does Internet Explorer rule it out?), the desktop is feasible (they would most likely become an all-Mac campus) but if the college currently has their financial data and student records in a Microsoft product or run on a Windows server, that migration could have a high six-figure price tag by itself.
If the donor wants to stipulate that the donation can only be spent on non-MS software, fine. The college would probably choose to stop buying a lot of Microsoft products but no college should have its affairs dictated by a big donor.
Slashdot Mirror
I enjoyed Mortal Kombat but that may have been partially due to a "contact high" of enthusiasm from the 13yr. old boys sitting two rows in front of me.
From the nytimes article: ...he hooked up with Ms. Sachs, a former producer with Geraldo Rivera who later worked in marketing at several Internet companies.
That was kind of refreshing to read. It indicates that the scuzz at the bottom of the gene pool isn't getting bigger, it's just recirculating. That's my delusion and I'm sticking with it!
Submit a patch.
</CmdrTaco>
this will probably get used for pr0n, and do you really want to watch pr0n in the same room with your cow-orkers?
;-)
Why would I want to watch the same pr0n as them anyway? They can have all the little people and bungie cords they want, it's all lunchmeat, all the time for me
...and when using a network transfter protocol that doesn't understand the metadata in question
I think that's more the fault of the transfer servers and clients rather than the protocols (the protocols shouldn't have to care) but it's still another important case. I guess my point was that while the environment or implementation makes file streams problematic, the concept of file streams, at least for use by metadata, is a good one. For multiple data streams I think something like OS X's bundling (which is pretty much just a directory with a special bit set) is more appropriate. I could believe there are instances where multiple data streams in a single file is a good idea, I just can't think of any.
Nope. Server has tools for setting up shares, user accounts, web server configuration, etc. which do not come with OS X. Then there's stuff that *isn't* included with OS X at all like Worgroup Manager. I'm not sure about NetBoot, I'm sure any AppleShare volume can be used as the boot source for NetBooting but I don't know what other features go into running a NetBoot server.
NTFS supports streams but pretty much the only use it gets is preserving Mac resource forks on Mac shares. NTFS actually goes beyond the Mac resource fork by supporting not just 2 streams but many (either 255 or "unlimited," I don't remember which).
The concept of supporting at the filesystem level data and metadata together is awesome. It's much cleaner than trying to stash metadata at the beginning or end of the data stream using a myriad of formats. It's only a problem when dealing with other filesystems which don't have such support.
Pretty much, at least between OS X and the unlimited client OS X Server. I don't know what they do to limit you to 10 clients for that version. I saw in the latest update that Server comes with Apache 2.0 (in addition to 1.3.x I think) but for the most part Server is just a set of GUI tools for controlling what's on any OS X. But they're good tools.
unless you use a really feeble definition of "adware." QuickTime Player *is* nagware, what with the "upgrade to QuickTime Pro" message which regularly appears when you launch it. The only ads are those which appear when you launch Player by itself instead of how it usually gets launched, by clicking on a QuickTime link or file. Apple calls these "HotPicks" and the Preferences include a checkbox to turn them off. It's silly to complain about something so innocuous which can even be turned off!
At the moment the HotPick is "click to hear Fleetwood Mac's new album 'Say You Will'."
I think ad-supported applications can be a good thing as long as they're not too in your face. Eudora's ad-supported option, for instance, is reasonable.
Just to nitpick, QuickTime is not a codec but it's very good that people are working on totally free alternatives to patented-encumberd codecs.
Please provide evidence that there is a high-end, non-free version of QSS. Real and Microsoft may do it that way, Apple doesn't. QSS is the razor and the blades are QuickTime Pro (plus other software) and the license fees people pay to provide QuickTime installers (possibly not that big a factor in these post-CD-ROM times).
I think ragingmime's theory that NPR wanted Apple to somehow sponsor their QuickTime streams (by paying for some/all of the bandwidth used perhaps) is not bad. It's sheer speculation but plausible.
Even though Apple's site says QuickTime Streaming Server requires OS X Server, it really doesn't. You can install it on a regular OS X system.
I just do a Darth Vader imitation and speak in Pig Latin. Since I started doing this I haven't been hassled by The Man once!
You actually have to do your homework? OMG, more violations of the Geneva Conventions!
The security part needs improving but overall this sounds like a good idea. Homework assignments are all recorded in one place so everyone knows what was assigned, no disagreements or confusion not just between parents & students but also students & teachers. Of course parents should talk to their children about school and their homework but this site shouldn't serve as a substitute but rather a starting point, one which eliminates the dreary recitation of what homework was assigned.
Google doesn't provide a "user experience", it provides a search engine, and nothing more.
This is all it takes to get marked up as Insightful? You're so wrong. Of course Google provides a user experience, it's a sparse, efficient, targeted experience which stands in great contrast to so many other sites. A lot of time, effort, and testing goes into finding new things to offer while maintaining that Google experience. Haven't you read the articles about how careful they are, particularly when they introduced Google News? And calling Google News can hardly even be called a "search engine."
Producing a good user experience may not require elegant logarithms or take advantage of latest CPU but it's challenging work and it's important. I appreciate good work in the field and whether you realize it or not, so do you.
If you never met that kid, you *were* that kid.
Yes and even at non-public universities, the university uplinks are often through a non-profit which has clauses about non-commerical use. It's not like the do content scanning or anything but it's not cool to go bitching because network problems are intefering with a business that you're not supposed to be doing over that network anyway.
Wow, that takes me back. Back in college, all my D&D/pothead friends loved The Wizard of Speed and Time. One of them had it on video. I remember enjoying it but I don't think I was sufficiently altered to enjoy it as much as they did.
BTW, MS has VBA, which can be used to do all sorts of shit on your PC, like Outlook viruses, Word viruses, etc, but Apple's AppleScript seems to be relatively secure whilst still providing enough functionality (see the bottom of this [apple.com]). Although perhaps it's because Apple's marketshare isn't seen as big enough for virus-writers to really take notice - I don't know.
It's mostly about market share. In OS 9 you pretty much were limited to conventional trojans because you can't really conceal the fact that a script was running. With OS X, they don't have that problem *and* there's all kinds of new ways to script things.
Another part of the market share is mail client, a prominent method of propogation. OS X's Address Book is very vulnerable to scripted access so a virus which uses Address Book and Mail.app to propogate is feasible. It may not happen quite as "under-the-radar" as it does in Outlook [Express] but it could happen.
Of course you still have to get your script to run. Windows is bad because Outlook and Internet Explorer (with ActiveX) have had a history of automatically running code with little to no user intervention. I don't think you can really get anything useful to run just by sending an email or having it open in OS X but tricking people to launch an attachment isn't too hard (elfbowling). On the Mac is easier to conceal what's executable since it doesn't depend upon filename extensions. People are accustomed to installers in OS X asking for an admin password so a phony installer could use that to do other stuff (I think real installers use something built into OS X so the password isn't exposed to 3rd party code). Most people run OS X as an admin and admins can do *anything* using sudo so with the logged in person's password, a trojan could quickly get root access.
OS X leaves has all its sharing options off by default but they can be enabled without prompting for a password (assuming the user is an admin, which they are by default). Appleshare, Apache, and Samba won't expose any useful data by default but they and SSH give crackers a remote avenue for buffer overflows password cracking and the user probably wouldn't even notice.
Just an update (tho' no one will read this), Mozilla crashed Windows again so replacing my profile didn't help. This time it crashed while I was using the mouse scroll wheel to scroll down in this page of JPEGs while it was loading (the mouse is a USB Kensington but I'm only using Microsoft's built-in mouse support). I've now dropped my color depth to 16 bit (for some reason I can't choose 2048x768 when the depth is set to 24bit) so we'll see if Mozilla crashes Windows any more.
Here's a hypothetical computer company. The company thinks it can save money by firing their U.S. phone support people and out-sourcing it to a company in India. The company's PC assembly workers get wind of this and say "if you fire our union brothers in phone support, we'll strike" (the assembly workers probably wouldn't be in the same union as phone support but separate unions often support each other.)The computer company can't send PC assembly overseas because they specialize in BTO options and the shipping time would kill them. So, the company keeps the phone support in the U.S. to avoid trouble with the assembly workers.
Or maybe the company just wants to send consumer phone support overseas but keep corporate & server support in the U.S. because those customers won't tolerate a drop in quality. But all the support people are in a union so they all threaten to strick if some of the jobs are shipped overseas. The company capitulates. Or if the company decides it can putlast the strikers or even afford to hire new corporate & server support people (and they can find them), the company does it anyway.
The is just a part of the way unionization is supposed to help workers.
They stopped selling a Red Hat Guest OS Pack well before the buyout was announced (someone I know found it missing in January but I think it went away in late Fall 2002). It's disappearance might still be tied to the buyout or they might have decided that it wasn't profitable (possibly because of how frequently Red Hat is updated compared to Windows).
The VPC for Windows Technical Reference PDFis still online and contains information about running various non Microsoft OS's. Even though it says "for Windows" almost everything applies to the Mac version as well because the emulated hardware is the same (yes, you can move virtual drive files between Mac and Windows versions of VPC).
The Connectix forum for VPC for Mac (as well as the one for Windows) also has a section dedicated to iscussing Linux/Unix as a Guest OS and another for "Other OSs." The forum moderators (I assume they work for Connectix) do participate in some discussions.
No, it's an Asus A7V133 with a 900MHz Athlon.
Mozilla makes my Windows (2000 Pro, SP3) freeze sometimes and I have a Matrox G450 DualHead (True Color, 2048x768 spanned across 2 monitors). It's not a true BSOD but video doesn't change, it won't accept any mouse/keyboard input, if an MP3 is playing (WinAmp3 or MusicMatch7.5) it will finish playing but won't play any more, it will respond to a ping but won't open any connections (file sharing or via RPC). There's no record in the event log or anywhere else of what happened.
I tend to leave Mozilla running for days and usually have 3-12 tabs open. The freezes seem to happen as a page is loading, even if it's loading by using the Back button. I removed the Flash plug-in to make sure it wasn't causing it (plus it has happened on sites which don't use Flash like Penny Arcade). Yesterday I removed the entire Mozilla profile folder (C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data\Mozilla\) let it recreate it then moved my bookmarks and cookies into the new profile. I noticed the registry.dat file was up to 390K which seemed odd. We'll see if it happens again but this thread makes it sound like a lower level problem. If it happens again, I'll try dropping the color depth down to 24bit.
That's not what the posting says. The school can't buy or license Microsoft products, but it sounds like faculty and students can certainly install whatever they like on school computers.
If the computer is running an OS other than Windows, practically speaking they're not going to be able to install Windows programs. They don't want to install an OS themselves (and certainly don't want to pay for it) and they shouldn't have to. What kind of service would the school be providing to its employees if they couldn't even give them the operating system they want? Why would a student be installing software on a school computer anyway?
A university like this needs a single, standard computing platform. Right now, that platform is Windows.
I disagree on both counts, they don't need a single platform and right now it is not Windows, at least not at the 5 colleges and universities I've had personal experience with. Macs are still very much in higher education. "Windows" isn't a single platform anyway, every version has differences which can be significant from a support perspective and schools can't afford to replace machines or upgrade operating systems to make every single machine run the same OS. It's more important to be standardized in certain application spaces, especially "office suites." This makes it feasible to switch away from something like MS Office but also shows how hard it is to do in a piecemeal way unless document conversion is rock solid.
They aren't talking about "taking all MS products off the campus", they are talking about not having the university make site purchasing agreements. Presumably, individual students, faculty, and researchers can keep buying whatever they like.
That's not what it says, it says NO software from Microsoft. They can't dictate what faculty and students buy with their own money but everything else, lab computers, faculty computers (unless perhaps it's bought with a grant), staff computers all have to be bought without Windows and run no Microsoft software. So what if a faculty member can buy Microsoft software if they can't run it on the school supplied computer? If it's okay to buy Macs (does Internet Explorer rule it out?), the desktop is feasible (they would most likely become an all-Mac campus) but if the college currently has their financial data and student records in a Microsoft product or run on a Windows server, that migration could have a high six-figure price tag by itself.
If the donor wants to stipulate that the donation can only be spent on non-MS software, fine. The college would probably choose to stop buying a lot of Microsoft products but no college should have its affairs dictated by a big donor.