I tend to separate "applications" and "games". If gaming is you bag, great, Windows is it.
I tend to disagree on the status of MIDI and Video editing (and screen capture demos) on Linux (Unix). But it's moot. For you, Windows (XP, Vista) is the choice.
Now, given that I *don't* play those sorts of games (I do play board, strategy and puzzle class games), and I am a developer (Solaris, Windows, Linux), Linux is the choice. Linux can run the Microsoft tool chain, and it's native tool chain. The Linux native tool chain is very compatible with Solaris.
And, it (Linux) has support for common "office" tasks. I keep Windows XP and Solaris 10 around as target platforms, but my primary is Linux.
The author can't be talking about procedural programming in the classic sense. On a re-read, I suspect that "procedure" is somehow equivalent to "action". Especially the part about building weapons from components.
The implication is that "Spore" (whatever that is) has a calculus of action. Which (almost) makes sense. I imagine (again, back to the weapon example), that a cartridge contains "x" grams of explosive, that yeilds a force, acting on the ballistic component. That force must be containable by the barrel chosen, or the weapon explodes. Accleration can be computed, influenced by barrel length, and destructive force computed.
What I don't see is how these arbitrary physical limits are enforced. If they aren't, a handgun with the power of a howitzer could be constructed.
So Linux has never been a consideration for you at home? I also presume work, as well. Because it doesn't have applications (as you state)...
This doesn't make sense. How would you know? Presumably, you have never used GIMP, and you are commenting about it. Presumably, you have never used OpenOffice.org, or Evolution, or GNumeric, either. And yet you comment on them. Presumably, you have never used Firefox, either. Your statement was rather a blanket comment.
Or, have you used these applications under Microsoft Windows(tm), and found them wanting?
This will be accepted as a "tier 1" supported platform by ATI, nVidia, and other "binary only" vendors immediately.
Basing on Redhat/Fedora/RHEL means a lot of stabilty. Having "legal" video support in a different branch means that Fedora can pursue the free software goal without being distracted by critics calling for non-free features. "Fedora sucks - it doesn't do MP3 and DVD out of the box" goes away (hopefully). The answer becomes "If you want non-free, go Global".
I hate the name, though. Indeed, Global will be a competitor to Ubuntu, but I would much rather have a "hat" name. From the summary, I would recommend Tilley.
Openoffice.org may well be the reference implementation for ODF. But the specification appears reasonable. If Openoffice.org's behaviour differs from a reading of the specification, it may actually be a bug in Openoffice.org.
And now on to OOXML. There are parts of the specification which simply say behaviour is to correspond to an implementation of Word, the details of which are not expounded on.
Which means a license of these copies of Word need to be aquired, and the behaviour needs to be reverse engineered. Since disassembly is not allowed by EULA, black box cases need to be generated. Of course there CANNOT be a guarantee that the behaviour covers all cases -- which means that the ONLY way of handling these cases is by actually including the relevant code.
But, WAIT. Microsoft has the copyright, and this is not due to expire in our lifetimes (neither mine nor yours).
So, the only TRUE consumer application of OOXML is Microsoft Word.
Of course other applications can PRODUCE clean OOXML, but writing "clean" DOC files was never much of an issue either. Reading DOC files has been the problem.
An implementor of ODF can argue with the Standards. And implementor of OOXML must just accept that "Word xyz" can do anything it wants, and this behaviour is codified into the standard.
pkg is a problem? I actually wish that RedHat had gone with pkg, instead of re-inventing the wheel. And, a layer (like yum) could be put on top of pkg.
As to the plethora of tools -- SUN customers may be running scripts done on SunOS, using BSD semantics. Or Sys5 semantics. Or GNU semantics. Especially difficult if they are all needed.
So, Solaris defaults to Sys5, and gives (ccs/bin) the option to use BSD, and (via installing) the option to use GNU. Seems reasonable to me.
Even Linux has such schisms (eg. the 2.0 kernel does BSD ptty, 2.2 does Sys5 ptty). I don't know if the old way is supported on new kernels... (I don't care, either, it's just illustrative). On Solaris, I do have the back compatibility available, if needed (generally).
Murdoch should look at expanding AppCert, and put the GNU tools in like the ccs one. Also, a pkg/rpm converter might be nice. Beyond that... why?
Even the SC spreadsheet does "complex formulas and scripts" just fine. TeX works for "complex formulas" much better than anything else.
Even troff is usable for most word processing. It is (arguably) superior to Word in several ways.
I will argue that since Word is not capable of SIMPLE formatting in a sane way, it is not a tool that should be used.
If you need a heading (for example) that has parts that are both flush left and flush right, a tab must be set on right margin. The tab cannot be set relative to the margin, and thus, when the right margin is adjusted, the tabs must be manually adjusted. Word fails at this simple task. Neither TeX or TROFF has this problem.
It may or may not be a bad game -- but she never got ANYWHERE with it. Renamed it to "Kill Lara", and played it for laughs (how many ways can Lara die?)
A PC game called "Baby". Babies being thrown out of a burning building - catch them or they go "splot" on the ground. Disgusting, but strangely, fun. (vintage, CGA, early 80's). The silly banana game packaged with MS BASIC -- not funny.
Sims. This one I get a laugh over. You get to have a "life" in a computer. Modeling life outside the computer. Why? It may not be a bad game, or maybe it is. Who's to know? Anyway, I laugh whenever I see someone playing it. Of course, I have the urge to see someone playing Sims inside of Sims...
Same deal for "Second Life".
I guess if its "bad", its "good". So the problem is one of definition.
Where I live, the government charges a levy *on top of the price of the player*. The levy is then distributed to the artists in compensation for copying of music.
A levy is *also* charged on any blank CD I purchase.
So, I stand by my statement: I pay 3 times for music I buy from iTunes ALREADY, if I transfer that music to a CD.
But, its ok -- I support the system:) At least my countries equivalent to the RIAA can't sue anyone!
Since Vista took 5 years, and (somewhere around) 1 to 2 billion US dollars...
We can figure out if dumping is being done. The maximum market penetration of the product is under 1 billion copies. It takes 1 to 2 dollars to produce - so the maximum that can be made on Vista at that sales point is 5 billion dollars.
It wouldn't even cover the engineering expense until its life is half over... And I don't believe 1 billion copies -- I would estimate a few hundred million at best. If we say 200M valid purchases, at $7, comes to 1.4 billion dollars. That will never cover the expenditure.
So, yes, dumping.
Its dumping until the price hits somewhere around $20 per copy, but that wouldn't sustain Microsoft.
In THAT case, you are against the shutdown of allofmp3.com? After all, its "just globalization".
I would LOVE to import 7 dollar Windows into North America, and sell them for 20 dollars. That would certainly level the playing field -- we are just talking globalization, right?
I work as a contract IT worker/developer in North America. If *I* quote on a job, I have to factor in relevant license costs. If someone in China or India quotes, *they* have to factor in costs as well.
If their costs are 1/100 of mine... simply because Microsoft is "giving them a break" (and, note, Microsoft development WAS in North America), Microsoft is giving offshore workers a bonus.
Why should it cost me so much more? It makes me less competitive.
The idea that an "anti-virus" program that does signature checking against a (almost continuously) updated database of virus signatures is probably a good source of "genetic material" for a virus will eventually occur to someone who does malware.
And, just for grins, its catalogued. So, to use that genetic material, the virus sinply needs the key (and the knowledge that a particular anti-virus program is installed). That is probably denser than trying to keep the infection information with the virus itself.
In other words, target Kaspersky "protected" systems (or any other "anti-virus" vendor" specifically.
Why? Hell, I would do it just because it would amuse me to no end!
I send email signed with GPG. Mess with the headers, sure, but the BODY can't be tampered with. Read, yes, tamper, no.
If something must remain confidental (source code, thoughts, company plans), it is put onto a server, and a reference sent via email (with GPG signing). The recipient can CERTAINLY go to the web page, where she will be redirected to an SSL page.
As soon as the SSL connection is set up, I use Apache Basic Authentication. Give me a user name and password. And these are reasonably secure. At least, I can detect hacking attempts, and take down the server if needed.
Won't tell anyone anything, really... And, for good measure, the server isn't in the US (and if I *were* in the US, it would be located out of the US anyway).
Got this error when trying to look at the third party license. But, my plan is to distribute all documents in ODF format, and send the converter (or a link to it, if needed).
I just wonder if it will be legal to redistribute, thus ending my dependence on Word once and for all. Note that a converter INSIDE Word can be 100% accurate, because its normal Word plugin functionality. An external converter may well be flawed (because it has to actually read and interpret the Word binary format). The internal converter doesn't have to read or interpret -- it receives exact instructions on what the document should be. This can be accurately written as ODF, thus removing interop issues.
The plugin is rather large (31MB), which is the only remaining issue. Since I don't use a recent Word release (last I have is Word 2000), I can't really test the component. So, I am looking for reports on the software (and an answer as to whether I can redistribute, or have to send people to the SUN site).
Well over 90% of "your customers" get their modems supplied by you. So, why are you asking for the CMAC? That should be "in the system" already.
So, this problem should have been resolved in 30 seconds. Either 123a and 123b were both subscribers, and they had the "close" CMACs, which would require escalation, or they (most likely) did not. Which would have made it easy.
So -- record the CMACs (why not?). Ask "Did you obtain the modem from us?". Escalate to your modem supplier to make "8" and "B" more distinct.
Your company shows smiling, happy people using the service. You claim excellent customer service. You kill the little guy who DOES offer excellent customer service. And you blaim the customer.
XP as sold by default does NOT support SATA DVD. If you installed XP from the DVD, it *would* work (as in boot), but would *not* see the DVD. It would ALSO not see your "recent" network interface. The only way to get stuff in would be via USB key.
So -- XP is a no-go on that particular machine, UNLESS it is customized by the hardware vendor, which is NOT a fair comparision.
Of course there is an "easy" solution... Encrypt everything, rencode the encrypted version to ASCII, PNG content, and WAV formats and then transport that via normal http requests. But, break it into a "page with rich content", hitting n servers.
The data will expand (roughly by 2x, it will actually be a bit less). Since the throttle is 10KB compared to 5MB, its 500 times slower. So, this will speed up your transfer by 250 times. The value of "n" would then be 8 to 10, which corresponds well to "light" rich content web pages.
The attack Rogers has is to block sites -- but this would work for a few months. If a rolling bank of IPs could be used, it would be better. Indeed, Rogers offers "personal web sites" that could be utilized (why have the traffic count to your cap, and most people don't use the personal web site anyway). Basically, download *from* personal web sites, and upload to them as well.
I am annoyed by the slowdown. I am not sure if SSH traffic is being tampered with (it is certainly not as bad as bittorrent traffic).
Maybe I should start experimenting... But it would take a while for the network effect to kick in to support such a thing.
So, here I am, running a small network (10+ computers) in a home business environment.
I do have 2 instances of Windows 98SE and 1 instance of Windows XP SP2 deployed (the Windows 98SE for desktop activity and XP for some testing and support roles). I presume that because network access is proxied, cleansed, firewalled and NAT'd, that things are fairly secure.
And, they are. I cannot allow the XP machine directly onto the internet, due to regulatory security concerns (and my business does involve other peoples codebases).
I am thinking of deploying Vista; indeed I almost have (one client wanted some Vista work done). And now, BANG!, I learn that Vista will convert my carefully proxied, cleansed, firewalled and NAT'd system into Swiss cheese, by default...
Thanks, Microsoft. I sure hope that you had the best security people in the business pore over that feature. But still, no warantee -- so I guess any Vista installation will have to be COMPLETELY off-net for a while.
But, that can't be done, because it needs to validate. I guess I would need to turn OFF my network, let Vista validate, and then take it off-net... But that won't work (it does for XP, thank heavens); as I understand it, Vista will need revalidation every 6 months or so...
So, what I need to know is -- how do I safely and prudently deploy Vista, with the assumption that it is a hostile component? Or, can I disable Teredo completely? And, are there other components in Vista that are equally bizarre?
My clients are going to start demanding Vista work any day now...
If that was the concern, Microsoft wouldn't trust its OWN employees. The "web of trust" MUST be extended to electoral overseers.
And, if Microsoft doesn't want the software 'vetted, the election machines simply cannot be based on Microsoft software.
In order to maintain secrecy -- all copies of the source can be tagged (an example is to add a pattern of whitespace to the code). If a copy leaks, it can be traced back to the source. At that time, damage can be assessed.
Mac OS X may work for you. In which case, good, use it.
It has several problems that make it difficult for me to deploy. (I run a business at home). Of course my needs may not represent the "average". But this is illustrative of why standards are important (note that I can fit standards compliant OSs into my framework without much trouble -- currently Linux and Solaris, although I have used others).
I have a RAID5 central server with quite a bit of storage on-line. Automount is used on Linux and Solaris to provide a consistent view of the storage (including read-only CD/DVD images). This does not fit into the OS X desktop model at all. Applications/data would need to appear on the desktop, even though the filesystem won't be mounted until the application/data is actually used.
GNOME provides a consistent "desktop" view from both Linux and Solaris. Mac OS X doesn't support the same desktop protocols.
I use compute servers, with X as a remote protocol. X is available on Mac OS X, but the native applications don't use it (and would thus not be available on other workstations).
Even Windows doesn't fit into this environment (although SAMBA can provide a great deal of the mapping needed, but synching passwords is a serious pain). VNC is also a partial solution.
Given OS X needs Apple hardware, I can't really deploy it. Apple doesn't make any hardware that I find interesting or particularly useable (eg. 3 button mouse, good keyboard, system expandable to my needs). I am slightly interested in the "Mac mini" as a low-cost workstation, but only in a diskless configuration (which Apple doesn't offer).
If Apple did produce a diskless boootp "Mac mini", I would use it. But, I would likely run Linux or BSD on it.
I prefer Kworld ATSC tuner (model 110), and Adaptec hardware SD tuner (hardware MPEG2 encode). The Adaptec simply because I got a load of them cheap. There is a dual SD hardware tuner available (Hauppauge model PVR-500) that comes without a remote (because the remote is integrated into the case. I also use these.
For video out, I use ATI x700 or better, or NVIDEO 6800 (or 5200 if HDTV output isn't needed -- quality SD output at a very good price point).
Look for passive cooling on the video card; some vendors (not many) offer this.
Passive cooling for the CPU (butterfly cooler), and an AMD x2 2Ghz is fine. Get lots of PCI slots on the mainboard (4 minimum).
Best deal is to contact me (sales plug) -- my prices are reasonable, and I set up MythTV for you (and support it, 3 years parts, lifetime labour). My systems also use flash memory for the OS and application, allowing completely silent operation if the disk array is in another room (this is desirable if you want a RAID array of 1 to 3 terrabytes).
One of the claims is that private investigators in Oregon need licensing. MediaSentry was not licensed in Oregon, and KNEW this (or SHOULD have known, since they claimed investigative expertise). Thus EVERY MediaSentry investigation in Oregon (and other states) broke the law. Systematically. Since the investigations where illegal, the demand for compensation is extortion, and ORICO applies.
And the complaint goes on... (this is just one of the goodies).
Slashdot Mirror
Ah.. I see.
I tend to separate "applications" and "games". If gaming is you bag, great, Windows is it.
I tend to disagree on the status of MIDI and Video editing (and screen capture demos) on Linux (Unix). But it's moot. For you, Windows (XP, Vista) is the choice.
Now, given that I *don't* play those sorts of games (I do play board, strategy and puzzle class games), and I am a developer (Solaris, Windows, Linux), Linux is the choice. Linux can run the Microsoft tool chain, and it's native tool chain. The Linux native tool chain is very compatible with Solaris.
And, it (Linux) has support for common "office" tasks. I keep Windows XP and Solaris 10 around as target platforms, but my primary is Linux.
3 times, and I still can't make sense of it.
The author can't be talking about procedural programming in the classic sense. On a re-read, I suspect that "procedure" is somehow equivalent to "action". Especially the part about building weapons from components.
The implication is that "Spore" (whatever that is) has a calculus of action. Which (almost) makes sense. I imagine (again, back to the weapon example), that a cartridge contains "x" grams of explosive, that yeilds a force, acting on the ballistic component. That force must be containable by the barrel chosen, or the weapon explodes. Accleration can be computed, influenced by barrel length, and destructive force computed.
What I don't see is how these arbitrary physical limits are enforced. If they aren't, a handgun with the power of a howitzer could be constructed.
So Linux has never been a consideration for you at home? I also presume work, as well. Because it doesn't have applications (as you state)...
This doesn't make sense. How would you know? Presumably, you have never used GIMP, and you are commenting about it. Presumably, you have never used OpenOffice.org, or Evolution, or GNumeric, either. And yet you comment on them. Presumably, you have never used Firefox, either. Your statement was rather a blanket comment.
Or, have you used these applications under Microsoft Windows(tm), and found them wanting?
This will be accepted as a "tier 1" supported platform by ATI, nVidia, and other "binary only" vendors immediately.
Basing on Redhat/Fedora/RHEL means a lot of stabilty. Having "legal" video support in a different branch means that Fedora can pursue the free software goal without being distracted by critics calling for non-free features. "Fedora sucks - it doesn't do MP3 and DVD out of the box" goes away (hopefully). The answer becomes "If you want non-free, go Global".
I hate the name, though. Indeed, Global will be a competitor to Ubuntu, but I would much rather have a "hat" name. From the summary, I would recommend Tilley.
On "unclear" specifications...
Openoffice.org may well be the reference implementation for ODF. But the specification appears reasonable. If Openoffice.org's behaviour differs from a reading of the specification, it may actually be a bug in Openoffice.org.
And now on to OOXML. There are parts of the specification which simply say behaviour is to correspond to an implementation of Word, the details of which are not expounded on.
Which means a license of these copies of Word need to be aquired, and the behaviour needs to be reverse engineered. Since disassembly is not allowed by EULA, black box cases need to be generated. Of course there CANNOT be a guarantee that the behaviour covers all cases -- which means that the ONLY way of handling these cases is by actually including the relevant code.
But, WAIT. Microsoft has the copyright, and this is not due to expire in our lifetimes (neither mine nor yours).
So, the only TRUE consumer application of OOXML is Microsoft Word.
Of course other applications can PRODUCE clean OOXML, but writing "clean" DOC files was never much of an issue either. Reading DOC files has been the problem.
An implementor of ODF can argue with the Standards. And implementor of OOXML must just accept that "Word xyz" can do anything it wants, and this behaviour is codified into the standard.
pkg is a problem? I actually wish that RedHat had gone with pkg, instead of re-inventing the wheel. And, a layer (like yum) could be put on top of pkg.
As to the plethora of tools -- SUN customers may be running scripts done on SunOS, using BSD semantics. Or Sys5 semantics. Or GNU semantics. Especially difficult if they are all needed.
So, Solaris defaults to Sys5, and gives (ccs/bin) the option to use BSD, and (via installing) the option to use GNU. Seems reasonable to me.
Even Linux has such schisms (eg. the 2.0 kernel does BSD ptty, 2.2 does Sys5 ptty). I don't know if the old way is supported on new kernels... (I don't care, either, it's just illustrative). On Solaris, I do have the back compatibility available, if needed (generally).
Murdoch should look at expanding AppCert, and put the GNU tools in like the ccs one. Also, a pkg/rpm converter might be nice. Beyond that... why?
Your approach is interesting -- but I don't think it works. Try changing the page margin after this operation. Does the table need adjusting?
Even the SC spreadsheet does "complex formulas and scripts" just fine. TeX works for "complex formulas" much better than anything else.
Even troff is usable for most word processing. It is (arguably) superior to Word in several ways.
I will argue that since Word is not capable of SIMPLE formatting in a sane way, it is not a tool that should be used.
If you need a heading (for example) that has parts that are both flush left and flush right, a tab must be set on right margin. The tab cannot be set relative to the margin, and thus, when the right margin is adjusted, the tabs must be manually adjusted. Word fails at this simple task. Neither TeX or TROFF has this problem.
Watching my wife play "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider".
It may or may not be a bad game -- but she never got ANYWHERE with it. Renamed it to "Kill Lara", and played it for laughs (how many ways can Lara die?)
A PC game called "Baby". Babies being thrown out of a burning building - catch them or they go "splot" on the ground. Disgusting, but strangely, fun. (vintage, CGA, early 80's). The silly banana game packaged with MS BASIC -- not funny.
Sims. This one I get a laugh over. You get to have a "life" in a computer. Modeling life outside the computer. Why? It may not be a bad game, or maybe it is. Who's to know? Anyway, I laugh whenever I see someone playing it. Of course, I have the urge to see someone playing Sims inside of Sims...
Same deal for "Second Life".
I guess if its "bad", its "good". So the problem is one of definition.
Where I live, the government charges a levy *on top of the price of the player*. The levy is then distributed to the artists in compensation for copying of music.
:) At least my countries equivalent to the RIAA can't sue anyone!
A levy is *also* charged on any blank CD I purchase.
So, I stand by my statement: I pay 3 times for music I buy from iTunes ALREADY, if I transfer that music to a CD.
But, its ok -- I support the system
But, such a scheme CANNOT determine if the amount has ALREADY been paid.
If a levy is imposed on flash players (and it is, here), *and* the flash player FURTHER imposes payment... that would be paying twice for material.
Another example. If someone downloads from "iTunes" here, and burns onto CD, they effectively pay for the music TWICE (or possibly THREE times):
1 - the levy paid on flash (possibly Apple players are exempt?)
2 - payment to iTunes
3 - levy paid on CD
Since Vista took 5 years, and (somewhere around) 1 to 2 billion US dollars...
We can figure out if dumping is being done. The maximum market penetration of the product is under 1 billion copies. It takes 1 to 2 dollars to produce - so the maximum that can be made on Vista at that sales point is 5 billion dollars.
It wouldn't even cover the engineering expense until its life is half over... And I don't believe 1 billion copies -- I would estimate a few hundred million at best. If we say 200M valid purchases, at $7, comes to 1.4 billion dollars. That will never cover the expenditure.
So, yes, dumping.
Its dumping until the price hits somewhere around $20 per copy, but that wouldn't sustain Microsoft.
In THAT case, you are against the shutdown of allofmp3.com? After all, its "just globalization".
I would LOVE to import 7 dollar Windows into North America, and sell them for 20 dollars. That would certainly level the playing field -- we are just talking globalization, right?
Significantly drop prices?!?
I work as a contract IT worker/developer in North America. If *I* quote on a job, I have to factor in relevant license costs. If someone in China or India quotes, *they* have to factor in costs as well.
If their costs are 1/100 of mine... simply because Microsoft is "giving them a break" (and, note, Microsoft development WAS in North America), Microsoft is giving offshore workers a bonus.
Why should it cost me so much more? It makes me less competitive.
The idea that an "anti-virus" program that does signature checking against a (almost continuously) updated database of virus signatures is probably a good source of "genetic material" for a virus will eventually occur to someone who does malware.
And, just for grins, its catalogued. So, to use that genetic material, the virus sinply needs the key (and the knowledge that a particular anti-virus program is installed). That is probably denser than trying to keep the infection information with the virus itself.
In other words, target Kaspersky "protected" systems (or any other "anti-virus" vendor" specifically.
Why? Hell, I would do it just because it would amuse me to no end!
I send email signed with GPG. Mess with the headers, sure, but the BODY can't be tampered with. Read, yes, tamper, no.
If something must remain confidental (source code, thoughts, company plans), it is put onto a server, and a reference sent via email (with GPG signing). The recipient can CERTAINLY go to the web page, where she will be redirected to an SSL page.
As soon as the SSL connection is set up, I use Apache Basic Authentication. Give me a user name and password. And these are reasonably secure. At least, I can detect hacking attempts, and take down the server if needed.
Won't tell anyone anything, really... And, for good measure, the server isn't in the US (and if I *were* in the US, it would be located out of the US anyway).
And, yes, I am paranoid.
"An error occurred while processing your request.
Reference #50.9a517bd1.1183915607.d08945c"
Got this error when trying to look at the third party license. But, my plan is to distribute all documents in ODF format, and send the converter (or a link to it, if needed).
I just wonder if it will be legal to redistribute, thus ending my dependence on Word once and for all. Note that a converter INSIDE Word can be 100% accurate, because its normal Word plugin functionality. An external converter may well be flawed (because it has to actually read and interpret the Word binary format). The internal converter doesn't have to read or interpret -- it receives exact instructions on what the document should be. This can be accurately written as ODF, thus removing interop issues.
The plugin is rather large (31MB), which is the only remaining issue. Since I don't use a recent Word release (last I have is Word 2000), I can't really test the component. So, I am looking for reports on the software (and an answer as to whether I can redistribute, or have to send people to the SUN site).
Well over 90% of "your customers" get their modems supplied by you. So, why are you asking for the CMAC? That should be "in the system" already.
So, this problem should have been resolved in 30 seconds. Either 123a and 123b were both subscribers, and they had the "close" CMACs, which would require escalation, or they (most likely) did not. Which would have made it easy.
So -- record the CMACs (why not?). Ask "Did you obtain the modem from us?". Escalate to your modem supplier to make "8" and "B" more distinct.
Your company shows smiling, happy people using the service. You claim excellent customer service. You kill the little guy who DOES offer excellent customer service. And you blaim the customer.
Change you system.
XP as sold by default does NOT support SATA DVD. If you installed XP from the DVD, it *would* work (as in boot), but would *not* see the DVD. It would ALSO not see your "recent" network interface. The only way to get stuff in would be via USB key.
So -- XP is a no-go on that particular machine, UNLESS it is customized by the hardware vendor, which is NOT a fair comparision.
I call Liar.
As I have noticed...
Of course there is an "easy" solution... Encrypt everything, rencode the encrypted version to ASCII, PNG content, and WAV formats and then transport that via normal http requests. But, break it into a "page with rich content", hitting n servers.
The data will expand (roughly by 2x, it will actually be a bit less). Since the throttle is 10KB compared to 5MB, its 500 times slower. So, this will speed up your transfer by 250 times. The value of "n" would then be 8 to 10, which corresponds well to "light" rich content web pages.
The attack Rogers has is to block sites -- but this would work for a few months. If a rolling bank of IPs could be used, it would be better. Indeed, Rogers offers "personal web sites" that could be utilized (why have the traffic count to your cap, and most people don't use the personal web site anyway). Basically, download *from* personal web sites, and upload to them as well.
I am annoyed by the slowdown. I am not sure if SSH traffic is being tampered with (it is certainly not as bad as bittorrent traffic).
Maybe I should start experimenting... But it would take a while for the network effect to kick in to support such a thing.
So, here I am, running a small network (10+ computers) in a home business environment.
I do have 2 instances of Windows 98SE and 1 instance of Windows XP SP2 deployed (the Windows 98SE for desktop activity and XP for some testing and support roles). I presume that because network access is proxied, cleansed, firewalled and NAT'd, that things are fairly secure.
And, they are. I cannot allow the XP machine directly onto the internet, due to regulatory security concerns (and my business does involve other peoples codebases).
I am thinking of deploying Vista; indeed I almost have (one client wanted some Vista work done). And now, BANG!, I learn that Vista will convert my carefully proxied, cleansed, firewalled and NAT'd system into Swiss cheese, by default...
Thanks, Microsoft. I sure hope that you had the best security people in the business pore over that feature. But still, no warantee -- so I guess any Vista installation will have to be COMPLETELY off-net for a while.
But, that can't be done, because it needs to validate. I guess I would need to turn OFF my network, let Vista validate, and then take it off-net... But that won't work (it does for XP, thank heavens); as I understand it, Vista will need revalidation every 6 months or so...
So, what I need to know is -- how do I safely and prudently deploy Vista, with the assumption that it is a hostile component? Or, can I disable Teredo completely? And, are there other components in Vista that are equally bizarre?
My clients are going to start demanding Vista work any day now...
Complete bullshit.
If that was the concern, Microsoft wouldn't trust its OWN employees. The "web of trust" MUST be extended to electoral overseers.
And, if Microsoft doesn't want the software 'vetted, the election machines simply cannot be based on Microsoft software.
In order to maintain secrecy -- all copies of the source can be tagged (an example is to add a pattern of whitespace to the code). If a copy leaks, it can be traced back to the source. At that time, damage can be assessed.
So, whatever.
Mac OS X may work for you. In which case, good, use it.
It has several problems that make it difficult for me to deploy. (I run a business at home). Of course my needs may not represent the "average". But this is illustrative of why standards are important (note that I can fit standards compliant OSs into my framework without much trouble -- currently Linux and Solaris, although I have used others).
I have a RAID5 central server with quite a bit of storage on-line. Automount is used on Linux and Solaris to provide a consistent view of the storage (including read-only CD/DVD images). This does not fit into the OS X desktop model at all. Applications/data would need to appear on the desktop, even though the filesystem won't be mounted until the application/data is actually used.
GNOME provides a consistent "desktop" view from both Linux and Solaris. Mac OS X doesn't support the same desktop protocols.
I use compute servers, with X as a remote protocol. X is available on Mac OS X, but the native applications don't use it (and would thus not be available on other workstations).
Even Windows doesn't fit into this environment (although SAMBA can provide a great deal of the mapping needed, but synching passwords is a serious pain). VNC is also a partial solution.
Given OS X needs Apple hardware, I can't really deploy it. Apple doesn't make any hardware that I find interesting or particularly useable (eg. 3 button mouse, good keyboard, system expandable to my needs). I am slightly interested in the "Mac mini" as a low-cost workstation, but only in a diskless configuration (which Apple doesn't offer).
If Apple did produce a diskless boootp "Mac mini", I would use it. But, I would likely run Linux or BSD on it.
Sorry for the delay.
I prefer Kworld ATSC tuner (model 110), and Adaptec hardware SD tuner (hardware MPEG2 encode). The Adaptec simply because I got a load of them cheap. There is a dual SD hardware tuner available (Hauppauge model PVR-500) that comes without a remote (because the remote is integrated into the case. I also use these.
For video out, I use ATI x700 or better, or NVIDEO 6800 (or 5200 if HDTV output isn't needed -- quality SD output at a very good price point).
Look for passive cooling on the video card; some vendors (not many) offer this.
Passive cooling for the CPU (butterfly cooler), and an AMD x2 2Ghz is fine. Get lots of PCI slots on the mainboard (4 minimum).
Best deal is to contact me (sales plug) -- my prices are reasonable, and I set up MythTV for you (and support it, 3 years parts, lifetime labour). My systems also use flash memory for the OS and application, allowing completely silent operation if the disk array is in another room (this is desirable if you want a RAID array of 1 to 3 terrabytes).
RTFM
One of the claims is that private investigators in Oregon need licensing. MediaSentry was not licensed in Oregon, and KNEW this (or SHOULD have known, since they claimed investigative expertise). Thus EVERY MediaSentry investigation in Oregon (and other states) broke the law. Systematically. Since the investigations where illegal, the demand for compensation is extortion, and ORICO applies.
And the complaint goes on... (this is just one of the goodies).