Well, OS/360 came about 5 years before UNIX and 10 years before VMS. The other major "everything is new" computer project of the day, Multics, never realy took of at all, died compleatly a decade ago, while there is a clear liniage from OS/360 to production systems of today.
OS/360 was a batch processing OS, and not the only OS available for System/360. OS/360 was the first OS to require "direct access storage devices" - hard drives, which gives you an idea of the state of the art at the time. JCL may be obtuse but it makes interaction with a computer infinitly easier then the previous system, which was no interaction at all.
More generally about the System/360: it is by far the most revolutionary computer system ever built. Any individual feature was not necessaraly amazing, any feature likely existing in isolation in competitors or research systems for years: but the 360 brought it all together and (this was unique) sold as a family of cross compatable computers and cross compatable peripherals.
This response is hardly worth the effort as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Well, you would be supprised. Cigarettes are paid with cash. Liquor is paid with cash. Once the cash changes hands, its done. Internet porn is paid for via credit cards. If a child pays for porn via either their parents, or a outright stolen, CC, when there is a dispute (as there will be), the porn site gets a chageback - and a fine. And is out of pocket for the bandwidth, servers and content that was viewed.
Minors viewing (stealing) porn not only has a very direct and immedeate financial cost, the aggregate effect is public backlash against their site, and the industry. Not all porn kings (let alone collage students pumping out porn from their frat houses) are Larry Flint and want, or are even capable of responding to such an attack.
Yes, a sale is a sale, but most sales to minors are far more trouble then they are worth.
Unix (which Linux inherits much from, and in software aquired traits can be inherited:-> ) has been in a much nastier environment than Windows for much longer. Recall that the Morris Worm targeted Unix and Vax systems...
Indeed, this is the fundamental problem with Microsoft, Windows and its community. Windows is built on the assumption that "All the world is an office LAN" which leads to "security is a means to protect stupid users from themselves and their cubemates". And attacks get a response of "How dare you, hackers... the problem is not us, it is the evil hackers" But, for nearly everying not tanted by this MS thought process, secutity is job 1. You will get directed attacks by smart people bent on doing evil things, thus security must protect against them.
Ive said it before, and I say it again, the UNIX/Internet community once was at least as bad as Microsoft in this regard (spam being perhaps the most obvious artifact of this era), the difference being that the Internet was first, and it was true to some degree. Ignorance is acceptable only for the first community... MS made this mistake a decade after the UNIX/Internet community figgured it out.
Well, the expansion in the.com days was backbone (dark) fiber. There is still the job of upgrading the "last mile", which partialy means running fiber out to the street corner, not to mention attaching 95% of that fiber up to switches/routers/whatever.
If this ruling actualy makes any difference or not is yet to be sceen doesnt change the fact that the infastructure is not "where it should be".. at least in many places not up to the level of technology that is commercialy available.
Well, do you want to build a web app, or a rich client?
You still avoid the biggest problem with client-side maintenance, that is: the client is the same across OSs, hardware platforms and (more or less), time.
For a coporate app, your going to be delivering it via something like XenWorks, or Ghost, or SMS, or whatever. If your not using something like that, in a >2 computer office, well, welcome to 1995 (When NAL/XenWorks first came out).
Users are quite willing to blindly click click click to get a nifty thing. That said, Mozilla-the-platform should do extension trust validation, eg cryptographicly, rather then / in addition to domain name based checking.
Re security model of pure-browser v. extension, I know Im playing both sides of the fence: Requiring an overt act by the user (or admin) to get extension level access is a Good Thing. Stupid users will blindly do the overt act. Smart users will get it working. It is the too-smart for their own good users who you need to be worried about. I guess demographics would tell you how much you need to be worried.
Well, there is that small portion of users who have some kind of virus scanning system in place. Trojaned executables on the CD or USB stick it would pick up... A evil USB stick itself, not so much....
Well, what you do is send down a known salt to the browser when you send the login page. The browser/JS mangles the two together and passes that across the network. This chalange/response concept is wildly used; SASL w/ cram-md5, digest-md5 being two specific implementations.
Yes, it means you need to send the password in cleartext once. Well, once is better then every time, while there is a chance a cracker is sniffing the first session, the chance of a cracker sniffing one of a infinite number of sessions is 1.
Speculating, but the furture of SuSE management is with ZenWorks and iManager. YaST works reasonably well for exactly one machine, but that scenario is rare in the Real World; Novell is king of managing/networks/ (as opposed to machines).
Well, see, the thing is that IBM was always a "services" company. For all practical purposes, no one ever bought IBM mainframes, and earlier technology like electromechanical punch card stuff. It was all leased/rented with hefty service contracts, with technical support (real support - custom developement) comming from one place: IBM. I remember reading (which is not to say I believe) that IBM once consitered giving (well, lending) hardware to customers and making money by selling punch cards!
The IBM PC was basicly the first ever IBM hardware you could just go out and pay cash for. OS/2 was basicly the first ever software from IBM you could go out and pay cash for. And once Compaq broke the BIOS, Im willing to bet that 80% of IBM PC related sales went to coporate customers. For that matter, untill Compaq started selling PCs at a reasonable price, the unbathed masses were buying cheaper, more powerfull, Apples, Commodores and what not.. with 80% of IBM PCs going to coporate, or at least small business, customers.
SNL is a lot like/.... You seem to remember that it once diddnt suck, but after careful reflection you realise it has always sucked. But yet, we come back for more. And more.
If they ever did it directly, it was breifly. The core of Yahoo! is the directory, a hand edited index of sites. Back in the day, to do effective searching you realy had to use both a spider based engine and a hand editied one. I only rarely - like less then once a month - use anything but Google, and havent since I first used it, when it was new.
Mind you, Ive been around. I remember when Altavista contained no adds... Or more correctly, it contained exactly one add - itself - a tech demo of Digitials hardware.
Broken up because of anti-trust in general, or "bundling"? The later, I dont know of any, and as for the former, not in so many words. AT&T, for instance, chose to spin off the local service companies - so they could enter the computer market. Well, thats not quite true: Standard Oil was broken up via anti-trust legislation.
Breaking up MS would be a extreem penality, that of a last resort. History has shown that courts act much slower then technology, and MS is generally willing to pay the fines and half-heartedly fufful requirements... MS continues to maintain a pattern of behaviour; the first, second, Nth resort has happened. How much further until breaking them up is the only thing left?
See, I hate microsoft like the next guy. But if you were in the position of MS, wouldn't you use your monopoly just the same way?
Ah, the "catch" of anti-trust legislation. Being a monopoly isnt illegal. Doing some paticular business practices isnt illegal. But being a monopoly and engaging in some paticlar business practices is.
MicrosoftOS: Desktop OS, Server OS MicrosoftHeavy: MSSQL, Exchange - Project server (with the Project API licensed to MicrosoftOffice) MicrosoftEnt: Games MicrosoftOffice: Office MicrosoftContent: MSN, Encarta....
And it could be like when they broke up Standard Oil. Any of the Micros~N's could call themselves Microsoft, in their given area. The could all immedeatly begin producing products in other areas (under a different trade name).
To prefute the arguement that many of these products are cross developed, cross marketed and difficult to sepearate: well, thats the whole fucking point. By forcing them to be developed sepearatly, any cross developement would need to happen between independent entities; a condition of the breakup could be that any of these agreements would need to be filed with the court, and anyone else who shows up with the same coin would get exactly the same deal... I believe that a (still) condition of the ATT breakup (and deregulation in Canada) is that the "incumbent" carries must rent their infastructure (outside plant, rack space in the COs) to anyone who shows up (if the rates are fair is a continious regulatory fight, but its something)
Microsoft Media Player is not the problem, it is a symptom of the problem (and treating the symptom wont help the problem as a whole). I think, in this paticular instance, that a media player - or at least a rich media API - is a reasonable component of an "OS" in 2005. Real is producting an obsolete product..
What is unfair is that MicrosoftGames gets access to MediaPlayer v+1 while $EVERYONEELSE only has access to the current version. What is unfair is that MSSQL devs can walk across campus and ask the 2003 devs to fix a OS bug, when the MySQL devs would be told to go fuck themselves. Microsoft Windows is not an OS for games: it is an OS for Microsoft Games... It is not an OS for DBs: it is an OS for MSSQL.
Re:Also the graphs were fine in terms of scaling
on
A Rubric for IT Analysis
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Actually, only having two values it is impossible to know how much difference there is. If you test 100 video cards made in the last 5 years, and their scores range from 500-11000, then these two cards are basicly the same speed. If your range is from 1800-1950 then they are radicly different. Numbers are meaningless without units, and units are meaningless if the user doesnt know what they are.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, OS/360 came about 5 years before UNIX and 10 years before VMS. The other major "everything is new" computer project of the day, Multics, never realy took of at all, died compleatly a decade ago, while there is a clear liniage from OS/360 to production systems of today.
OS/360 was a batch processing OS, and not the only OS available for System/360. OS/360 was the first OS to require "direct access storage devices" - hard drives, which gives you an idea of the state of the art at the time. JCL may be obtuse but it makes interaction with a computer infinitly easier then the previous system, which was no interaction at all.
More generally about the System/360: it is by far the most revolutionary computer system ever built. Any individual feature was not necessaraly amazing, any feature likely existing in isolation in competitors or research systems for years: but the 360 brought it all together and (this was unique) sold as a family of cross compatable computers and cross compatable peripherals.
This response is hardly worth the effort as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Skynet was a distributed system of PCs. A mainframe would have at least had one switch. Well, one button. That you have to pull out.
Well, you would be supprised. Cigarettes are paid with cash. Liquor is paid with cash. Once the cash changes hands, its done.
Internet porn is paid for via credit cards. If a child pays for porn via either their parents, or a outright stolen, CC, when there is a dispute (as there will be), the porn site gets a chageback - and a fine. And is out of pocket for the bandwidth, servers and content that was viewed.
Minors viewing (stealing) porn not only has a very direct and immedeate financial cost, the aggregate effect is public backlash against their site, and the industry. Not all porn kings (let alone collage students pumping out porn from their frat houses) are Larry Flint and want, or are even capable of responding to such an attack.
Yes, a sale is a sale, but most sales to minors are far more trouble then they are worth.
Indeed, this is the fundamental problem with Microsoft, Windows and its community. Windows is built on the assumption that "All the world is an office LAN" which leads to "security is a means to protect stupid users from themselves and their cubemates". And attacks get a response of "How dare you, hackers... the problem is not us, it is the evil hackers" But, for nearly everying not tanted by this MS thought process, secutity is job 1. You will get directed attacks by smart people bent on doing evil things, thus security must protect against them.
Ive said it before, and I say it again, the UNIX/Internet community once was at least as bad as Microsoft in this regard (spam being perhaps the most obvious artifact of this era), the difference being that the Internet was first, and it was true to some degree. Ignorance is acceptable only for the first community... MS made this mistake a decade after the UNIX/Internet community figgured it out.
Well, the expansion in the .com days was backbone (dark) fiber. There is still the job of upgrading the "last mile", which partialy means running fiber out to the street corner, not to mention attaching 95% of that fiber up to switches/routers/whatever.
If this ruling actualy makes any difference or not is yet to be sceen doesnt change the fact that the infastructure is not "where it should be".. at least in many places not up to the level of technology that is commercialy available.
Well, do you want to build a web app, or a rich client?
You still avoid the biggest problem with client-side maintenance, that is: the client is the same across OSs, hardware platforms and (more or less), time.
For a coporate app, your going to be delivering it via something like XenWorks, or Ghost, or SMS, or whatever. If your not using something like that, in a >2 computer office, well, welcome to 1995 (When NAL/XenWorks first came out).
Users are quite willing to blindly click click click to get a nifty thing. That said, Mozilla-the-platform should do extension trust validation, eg cryptographicly, rather then / in addition to domain name based checking.
Re security model of pure-browser v. extension, I know Im playing both sides of the fence: Requiring an overt act by the user (or admin) to get extension level access is a Good Thing. Stupid users will blindly do the overt act. Smart users will get it working. It is the too-smart for their own good users who you need to be worried about. I guess demographics would tell you how much you need to be worried.
Package your thingy as a extension. And/or wait for XULRunner to stabialize and package at as an application.
Well, there is that small portion of users who have some kind of virus scanning system in place. Trojaned executables on the CD or USB stick it would pick up... A evil USB stick itself, not so much....
Teacher: Unless you are also a devil
Kids: But not if your devilness is deminishing and the other devils is increasing.
QED
Tell me. Do you think that the decision of which distro for Novell to install took more then 5 minutes?
The rest of the Linux/BSD world who used xfree86 made the switch, lock, stock and barrel in about 3 months.
If your distro a) did this 19 months late; and b) managed to fuck it up, then Id think its time for a different distro.
Well, what you do is send down a known salt to the browser when you send the login page. The browser/JS mangles the two together and passes that across the network. This chalange/response concept is wildly used; SASL w/ cram-md5, digest-md5 being two specific implementations.
Yes, it means you need to send the password in cleartext once. Well, once is better then every time, while there is a chance a cracker is sniffing the first session, the chance of a cracker sniffing one of a infinite number of sessions is 1.
It isnt clear if you have, but if so: Why have you discounted NDS/eDirectory?
True, but high quality real guns have laser sights and go "swoosh". At least, if Bruce Willis is to believed.
Speculating, but the furture of SuSE management is with ZenWorks and iManager. YaST works reasonably well for exactly one machine, but that scenario is rare in the Real World; Novell is king of managing /networks/ (as opposed to machines).
*BZZT*, wrong. OSI was a complete protocol stack. Nothing today uses it, and only it, in its entirity, but bits and pieces are floating around.
/the/ ARP) is still used with SONET.
x.500 (LDAP structure), x.509 are OSI.
ATM neatly fits onto the bottom 3 layers of OSI (though these days, only the middle of these is used.. eg: PPPoE, ATM, IP)
Apparently various OSI routing protocols have been modified for IP.. An OSI ARP (not
And IP is a 5 layer system: physcial/data link/network/transport/application.
But thanks for playing. HTH, HAND
The question is, will Mikhail and Pamela be presenting consecutively, or concurrently ?
Well, see, the thing is that IBM was always a "services" company. For all practical purposes, no one ever bought IBM mainframes, and earlier technology like electromechanical punch card stuff. It was all leased/rented with hefty service contracts, with technical support (real support - custom developement) comming from one place: IBM. I remember reading (which is not to say I believe) that IBM once consitered giving (well, lending) hardware to customers and making money by selling punch cards!
The IBM PC was basicly the first ever IBM hardware you could just go out and pay cash for. OS/2 was basicly the first ever software from IBM you could go out and pay cash for. And once Compaq broke the BIOS, Im willing to bet that 80% of IBM PC related sales went to coporate customers. For that matter, untill Compaq started selling PCs at a reasonable price, the unbathed masses were buying cheaper, more powerfull, Apples, Commodores and what not.. with 80% of IBM PCs going to coporate, or at least small business, customers.
SNL is a lot like /. ... You seem to remember that it once diddnt suck, but after careful reflection you realise it has always sucked. But yet, we come back for more. And more.
If they ever did it directly, it was breifly. The core of Yahoo! is the directory, a hand edited index of sites. Back in the day, to do effective searching you realy had to use both a spider based engine and a hand editied one. I only rarely - like less then once a month - use anything but Google, and havent since I first used it, when it was new.
Mind you, Ive been around. I remember when Altavista contained no adds... Or more correctly, it contained exactly one add - itself - a tech demo of Digitials hardware.
Broken up because of anti-trust in general, or "bundling"? The later, I dont know of any, and as for the former, not in so many words. AT&T, for instance, chose to spin off the local service companies - so they could enter the computer market. Well, thats not quite true: Standard Oil was broken up via anti-trust legislation.
l =178&sortorder=articledate
Googling... Wikipeding....
Movie production houses used to own theaters ("vertical integration"), and this was broken up: http://www.mises.org/freemarket_detail.asp?contro
Breaking up MS would be a extreem penality, that of a last resort. History has shown that courts act much slower then technology, and MS is generally willing to pay the fines and half-heartedly fufful requirements... MS continues to maintain a pattern of behaviour; the first, second, Nth resort has happened. How much further until breaking them up is the only thing left?
MicrosoftOS: Desktop OS, Server OS ....
MicrosoftHeavy: MSSQL, Exchange - Project server (with the Project API licensed to MicrosoftOffice)
MicrosoftEnt: Games
MicrosoftOffice: Office
MicrosoftContent: MSN, Encarta
And it could be like when they broke up Standard Oil. Any of the Micros~N's could call themselves Microsoft, in their given area. The could all immedeatly begin producing products in other areas (under a different trade name).
To prefute the arguement that many of these products are cross developed, cross marketed and difficult to sepearate: well, thats the whole fucking point. By forcing them to be developed sepearatly, any cross developement would need to happen between independent entities; a condition of the breakup could be that any of these agreements would need to be filed with the court, and anyone else who shows up with the same coin would get exactly the same deal... I believe that a (still) condition of the ATT breakup (and deregulation in Canada) is that the "incumbent" carries must rent their infastructure (outside plant, rack space in the COs) to anyone who shows up (if the rates are fair is a continious regulatory fight, but its something)
Microsoft Media Player is not the problem, it is a symptom of the problem (and treating the symptom wont help the problem as a whole). I think, in this paticular instance, that a media player - or at least a rich media API - is a reasonable component of an "OS" in 2005. Real is producting an obsolete product..
What is unfair is that MicrosoftGames gets access to MediaPlayer v+1 while $EVERYONEELSE only has access to the current version. What is unfair is that MSSQL devs can walk across campus and ask the 2003 devs to fix a OS bug, when the MySQL devs would be told to go fuck themselves. Microsoft Windows is not an OS for games: it is an OS for Microsoft Games... It is not an OS for DBs: it is an OS for MSSQL.
Actually, only having two values it is impossible to know how much difference there is. If you test 100 video cards made in the last 5 years, and their scores range from 500-11000, then these two cards are basicly the same speed. If your range is from 1800-1950 then they are radicly different. Numbers are meaningless without units, and units are meaningless if the user doesnt know what they are.
Concerning your sig: Jodie Foster and Helen Hunt; Laurence Fishburne and Samuel L. Jackson. Talk about redundency!